"It is impossible for ideas to compete in the marketplace if no forum for
  their presentation is provided or available."         Thomas Mann, 1896

Letter from the President

John Hathaway-Bates
President & Executive Director
 

Please Note: The "Letter from the President" of The Business Forum evolved in 2001 from "Tomorrow's News" that we previously published in The Business Forum Calendar & Report since 1984.  It started out as a simple way for me to convey the benefits from conversations I have with leaders in Government, Academia and Business and potential problems that I learn about during my occupation as a Moderator of Think Groups for The Business Forum. However, since we began publishing on-line it has over the years become a personal "Bantering" from someone (me) surrounded day by day in the endeavor of Change. Usually it is whimsical in nature, and nothing more than my viewpoints on what I see happening around me on a daily basis.  The "Letter from the President" therefore, has little to do anymore with The Business Forum, it is just me sharing my thoughts with anyone who cares to read them.  Please feel free to publish it, or pass it on. (In this particular instance I would ask that you PLEASE forward it to every married Californian that you know, for, and trust me on this, you may well save their children from more heartache and hurt than you can even begin to imagine).

My little "Letter from the President" reaches more than a thousand Editors and Journalists at almost every English Language Newspaper in the world today, and it has been republished on occasion in several of them.  In fact there are few news organizations in the World that do not interact with us, in one way or another.  We also get more than a million hits every month, 341,388 Visitors last month see http://www.bizforum.org (most of which are from the Pacific States of America, although we also got visitors from another 182 Countries around the world last month).   Therefore, I may just very well be able to help a very large number of completely innocent families in the State of California from being manipulated by the Family Court System with this particular "letter", if only by encouraging them to try to avoid at all costs any "Solution Based Evaluation" that just might be forced upon them by some overworked Judge, as it was forced upon me, in the Family Courts in California, before they know exactly what it is that they have agreed to, or how it will most probably destroy their ongoing relationship with their children for the rest of their lives.

It is my considered opinion that the Family Court System in California is basically a sham.  No Judge can "without bias, faithfully, fully and fairly" hear a case without having the time to read the Case File, or hear witnesses; I doubt that even Solomon could have handled two dozen cases in less than seven hours a day, every day, five days a week!  Do not blame the Judges - blame the under funded and overworked system!  However the Judges I have met during this case were either lazy, incompetent, or in the case of one (who was later forced into retirement by Judicial Watch) was actually a racist in my opinion.  The Courts are far too overworked and under funded for you to be able to expect to get Justice from "The System" without unlimited funds.  The poor always lose in California!  I have occupied the untenable position throughout a Divorce action lasting for ten (10) years of being a father without sufficient funds or credit standing to retain an attorney, (due entirely I might add to the actions of  those operating the Court  System).

The third Judge in the Case, as you will see later, shouted me down and prevented me from defending myself or my family by cutting me off every time I tried to speak.  The Child Support Officer on my Case insisted on charging me for my youngest son to attend Page Private School and the Beverly Hills Y, which I had agreed to only to ensure he would be safe.  Problem: My son never attended either and his mother has pocketed the money for almost a decade now.  I do not owe a penny in child support!  But Child Support Services refuse to obey the Orders and refuse to credit the payments that my ex-wife garnishes from my pension.  The result being I cannot get American Citizenship; I have not seen my present wife for more than almost three years because of it; my driver's license was revoked, and I cannot get credit as no Judge will enforce the Court Orders; and my youngest son wanders the streets neglected while I pay for him to be safe in an after school care program.  Then, to make it more bizarre, our case was then assigned to a Court Evaluator (Ms. Karen Nakamatsu) who was an Asian-American, middle-aged "local" woman from Hawaii (as is my ex-wife) and she committed an act of pure character assassination against me that stripped me of all of my rights as the English  father of my ten year old English  son that everyone who is knowledgeable about the Case considers to be pure racism!  She totally ignored everything in the case file!  The System my friends just does not work!

The one thing that to my mind proves that there are second-class citizens in the California Family Court System, is that if you cannot afford an attorney and are therefore forced to defend yourself, the Court will shunt you to the end of the Calendar and your case will be heard at the end of the day, while cases where the parties are represented by lawyers will be given preference and a far greater allotment of the Court's time.  Therefore, by the time someone trying to defend his or her children without a lawyer gets to be heard, the Judge is tired and short-tempered; the Court Reporter has already typed for many hours, and is therefore more likely to make mistakes; and in my case, after the Clerk to the Court had sworn everyone in, he got up and left the Court to deal with the administration of cases with lawyers that had already been heard.  How does one get Justice when the clerk of the Court is absent from the hearing and is then entrusted to write up the results of it:  the following are the actual words of the Clerk of the Court from the hearing held before Judge Ann Dobbs on August 22nd, 2005 when he wandered back into the Court at the very end of the hearing:  It is like a scene from a novel by Charles Dickens.

CLERK: YOUR HONOR, I CAME IN AT THE TAIL END.  PETITIONER HAS SOLE LEGAL CUSTODY?

Transcript of the August 22nd, 2005 before Judge Ann Dobbs:  Page 33 - lines 14-15

I am not claiming that the clerk was biased, but merely that he was, in my opinion, incompetent, as was the Judge in not insisting that he was present during the hearing.  And so, my friends, my life, my dreams and all of my goals in life, and the needs of many others, were destroyed for the sole reason that several Judges refused me the time to call witnesses, or present evidence, or even to enforce the Court's own orders passed down from the Bench. 

I have watched incredulous while Judges have  "guessed" to speed things up, rather than "without bias, faithfully, fully and fairly heard" my case.  I collapsed in the Court House having a heart attack - and the Judge gave me a two hour recess to recover rather than set a later date to hear the case - and then while I was being admitted to Cedars Sinai hospital in Los Angeles for heart surgery - he actually continued without me there to be able to defend my children.  I have also had requests for Justice arbitrarily "denied a hearing"; and when on one occasion I was too ill to attend Court the Judge ruled "case dismissed in it's entirety", rather than allow a deferment and set another date.  On several occasions I had witnesses sat in the Courthouse all day waiting to be heard, (Bruce Clay's Letter)  who I could not call because the Judge arbitrarily decided that she did not "need" to hear them. There were four other witnesses also present that day who wished to testify to the environment my sons were being exposed to; but Judge Isabel M. Cohen wanted to end the hearing and go home, so she decided that she did not have the time, nor did she "need" to hear them.  I had filed a notarized statement from Jed Schertz, that obviously she had not bothered to read: my sons were being exposed to an environment that no young boys should have to suffer, but an overworked Judge just did not have the time to address it.  I have even had a Judge (Arnold J. Gold) refuse to enforce a legal subpoena!  But that is Justice in the Land of the Fee?  You will only get what you can pay for I have found!  And if you cannot afford a lawyer - you will be treated with polite contempt - for Poverty is the greatest sin in the California Judicial System! All I wanted was to protect my family and uphold my honor and reputation - but without the ability to "buy" Justice it has so far been denied to me.  Someone please explain it to me;  for I have lost faith in all that I once believed regarding Justice in the Land of the Fee!

The final insult happened on August the 22nd, 2005 when, in a matter of minutes, the lives of my youngest son and my wife, myself, and several others involved in the affair, were ruined by a middle-aged "Local" Asian American woman from Hawaii).  A bureaucrat, with the title "Court Evaluator" who took an oath to tell "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God" and then proceeded to do the absolute opposite and instead present a biased, often untrue, racist and slanted report to the Court in a derisory tone that the Transcript just cannot capture.  Even a casual reading of the evidence already held within the Case File (Court Record) would have proved to anyone that most of her report was completely and utterly false!  She destroyed the lives of several people that day, and what she presented to the Court was in fact nothing more than pure character assassination of one old Haole White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Male, (me); and please note: I am referring here to the Court Evaluator, and not to my ex-wife who also just happens to be a middle-aged "Local" Asian American woman from Hawaii!  This particular Court Evaluator (Karen Nakamatsu) went into Court and, UNDER OATH, carefully painted me to be an abusive, lecturing, lying, alcoholic, chain-smoking, racist, dead-beat father, who often cannot feed them and makes Racist distinctions between his own children. Which anyone who knows me will testify under oath is just not true - if only I could get a Judge who would hear them.  testimonials  Racism my friends is alive and doing very well in California!

It proved to me, and to everyone who knows me, that in Politically Correct, Liberal California merely being accused by a government employed bureaucrat makes your guilt certain and proven before a Politically Correct, Liberal Judge.  No proof is needed, no witnesses will be heard, evidence already accepted into the Court Records will be ignored and the only thing certain is that the Judge's condemnation of the innocent will be swift.

The fact that Karen Nakamatsu must have known that almost every word she stated was ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE, appears not to have concerned her in any way whatsoever!  She ignored the truth - she ignored the facts - she ignored the evidence already on file - she even ignored the Court's Orders - and I believe there is no way that she could have reviewed the Case File, as she swore under oath that she had done!  And she refused to talk to my son's stepmother who was caring for them five days a week, although the Court had ordered that she should do so!  The problem that I have now however, is that everything that Karen Nakamatsu, stated "UNDER OATH" after interrogating me for just twenty (20) minutes (one minute for each year of our family's experience) and supported by the rushed ruling of a Judge Pro Tempore (her honor Ann Dobbs) is now a lasting part of the Public Record, even though it is completely and utterly false!  She gave me a legacy that will last for all time that is just not true - and she knows it!

The fact is that there was ample evidence already in the Court Files, filed prior to the Hearing, that proves beyond any doubt whatsoever that Nakamatsu's report is pure and simple character assassination, and numerous witnesses are willing to testify to the fact, but of course they were not allowed the chance to do so; and then, as you will see later, I was shouted down by the Judge every time I tried to offer evidence, or protect my reputation, and was repeatedly told by the Judge to ask questions ONLY about a Report that I had never been given, or seen, or held  a copy of in my hands, even though I paid for it in advance, which was, in the concept of "The System", obviously unimportant! 

Anyone who knows me and what I do to earn a living will tell you that my business life is, and always has been, based entirely upon my character and my reputation as a gentleman - so I am sure you can see what this tool that the Court has now provided to my ex-wife, based upon Nakamatsu's false testimony, is able to do to my reputation and therefore to my business life!

But then, in the Land of the Fee who gives a damn?  Our little Case was just one out of dozens "processed" that day, by a Judge Pro Tempore who wanted to go home early, and then was promptly forgotten by every employee of "The System"; but never to be forgotten by those whose lives were ruined by it.  I would really like to be able to call witnesses to prove that Nakamatsu blatantly lied to the Court while "under oath" and to have my son David testify before the Court; for I am sure that his version of what he said to the evaluator would prove beyond a doubt that Nakamatsu failed in her duty to the Court - but the problem, in my opinion, is that the "California Family Justice System" does not really care what a twelve year old English boy, or his English father, or his stepmother, who has been caring for him five days a week, might want.  Nor does it care if a bureaucrat avoids, or bends the truth, or blatantly lies, while under oath - just as long as it can "process" at least two dozen cases, per day, per Judge. 

So, as it appears that I am unable to get a "fair" hearing in a California Family Court to protect my son's future, or my wife's and my own reputation, or to allow us to live together, and be able to rebuild our lives to be what we wish them to be, I am tempted to try it in the Court of Public Opinion across the world; for although I was unable to save my family in "The System", I may be able to warn other families of what they may have to face if they ever get caught up in the Family Court Department of the Los Angeles Superior Court in California. 

Also (obviously) - I have no wish to go to my grave with the Public Record wrongly stating that I am "an abusive, lecturing, lying, alcoholic, chain-smoking, racist, dead-beat father, who often cannot feed them and makes Racist distinctions between his own children – for the very simple reason that it is not true!

The transcript that follows this preamble is testimony given by the "Court Evaluator" Karen Nakamatsu; and the ultra-quick ruling of Judge Pro Tempore, Ann Dobbs, enforcing all of the demands of the Court Evaluator, exactly as she was told so to do.  Please Note:  No witnesses were allowed to give testimony to the Court and, as you will see, I was shouted down by the Judge before I could even ask for her to respect my rights; and evidence already held by the Court in the Case File, and an Order to Show Cause that I filed several months prior to the hearing on August 22nd, 2005, and the letter from my son's stepmother (who was caring for them five days a week) and letters and testimonials from friends, and letters from the Beverly Hills School District, were all totally ignored, (except where Nakamatsu lied to the Court in stating that I could not produce them) and were never allowed to be referenced to at all during the hearing - and, to top it off, the "evidence" the Court Evaluator took from my ex-wife (after she had told ME repeatedly that she was not authorized to accept any new evidence) was done without me being allowed any opportunity to see it, or review it, or counter it, prior to the evaluation, (in fact she handed it to me as we left the Court, with a sarcastic smile on her face). 

The most troubling aspect of the proceeding to my mind however, was the way that the "evaluation" was conducted and the rules that Nakamatsu applied during it.  I should better call it an "interrogation", for in my case that is exactly what it was.  A government bureaucrat asking me questions that indicated that she had already made up her mind before I even entered the room; and that she had an inbred hatred for White Anglo-Saxon Protestant men.

I have NEVER been given, nor have I ever seen, or even held in my hands, an actual copy of the Report, prepared by the Court Evaluator, Karen Nakamatsu, upon which my family's future has been decided.  However before Nakamatsu destroyed the lives of my youngest son, my wife and myself I was forced to pay $250 (in advance) to "The System", which I was led to believe was for a copy of the very same Report that I have never seen!

I explained the way it happened to an European friend of mine afterwards - to put it simply, I was interrogated in a windowless office by a rude, biased, and to my mind racist bureaucrat - she allowed no witnesses, no stenographer was present, no record of anything that was said - audio or video -  was made, and there was never an opportunity for the accused (me) to see the Report that was prepared against him.  Nor was I allowed to confront my accusers, or to tell the Court how the interrogator had acted during the interrogation, or to point out her obvious bias; for when I tried to do so, as you will read, the Judge shouted me down and prevented me from defending myself or my family - and then, the Judge imposed a Gag Order immediately after making her ruling. 

My friend stated to me that it sounded much more like a hearing held under the rules of the notorious "Jüdische Untersuchungsversuche" (Jewish Examination Trials) of Adolph Hitler's Third Reich, than something designed by the American Judicial System to handle child custody matters in the 21st Century - and in my humble opinion he was and still is absolutely and completely right, based upon my experience in the State of California!  

"Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly
 be seen to be done".           Lord Hewart, Chief Justice, United Kingdom, 1922-1940

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an
 inescapable network of mutuality, tied into a single garment of destiny.
Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly."  Martin Luther King

In California these admirable statements would appear to have been deemed to be unimportant to save the State time and money as this document surely proves! It is my considered opinion, that "Speedy Process" always outweighs "Justice" in California.

(THE JUDGE'S REGULAR COURT REPORTER'S RECOLLECTION OF THE EVENTS OF THE HEARING IS SHOWN BELOW IN GEORGIAN TYPEFACE) - (although she failed to include within her Report the Judge's statement at 3:15pm that the Court would close at 4:15pm and that she had other cases to rule on during that time frame - yet another reason why all hearings should be video taped). (Annotations to evidence in the Case File or testimony that was denied a hearing are shown in Arial typeface) and (my personal opinions and comments are shown in Bookman Old Style typeface).  To make it easier to understand I have placed the annotations and my comments directly after the statements made during the hearing.  Links to relevant letters, emails, documents, etc., are shown in Arial typeface.

Note:  You will notice that neither Judge Ann Dobbs, nor Karen Nakamatsu, ever once refers to the very reason that we were in Court in the first place; which was that my ex-wife had abducted our youngest son David (who was 10 years old at the time) against his wishes, causing him emotional trauma; and against the ruling Orders of the Court.

TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING HELD BEFORE JUDGE DOBBS, AUGUST 22ND, 2005

TIME:   P.M. SESSION

THE COURT:  IN THE MATTER OF BATES AND BATES, CASE OF BATES AND BATES, WOULD YOU SWEAR IN THE PARTIES AND THE EVALUATOR, PLEASE.

Please Note: The Filing documents were actually entitled Hollydee Gadow  vs. John H. Hathaway-Bates on the top of the front page.  My ex-wife never took my Family name, nor did she ever use it during our marriage; and the Judge using the secondary ranking of my Family name only adds insult to injury.

THE CLERK:  YES, YOUR HONOR.

WILL ALL PARTIES TESTIFYING PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT  HANDS.  YOU AND EACH OF YOU DO SOLEMNLY STATE THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU MAY GIVE IN THE CAUSE NOW PENDING BEFORE THIS COURT SHALL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD?

THE WITNESS:  I  DO.

MS. GADOW:  I  DO.

MR. HATHAWAY-BATES:  I  DO.

THE CLERK:  CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATOR PLEASE TAKE YOUR  PLACE UP AT THE WITNESS STAND.  MEANWHILE PETITIONER, MA'AM, PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME FOR THE RECORD.

MS. GADOW:  HOLLY  D. GADOW.

THE CLERK:  THANK YOU.  RESPONDENT, SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME  FOR THE RECORD.

MR. HATHAWAY-BATES:  JOHN HATHAWAY-BATES.

THE CLERK:  WILL THE CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATOR PLEASE  STATE AND SPELL YOUR FULL NAME FOR THE RECORD.

THE WITNESS:  KAREN, K-A-R-E-N, NAKAMATSU,  N-A-K-A-M-A-T-S-U.

THE CLERK:  THANK YOU.

The Clerk then stood up and left the Court Room.

THE COURT:  THIS MATTER WAS SCHEDULED FOR A FAST-TRACK EVALUATION AFTER BOTH PARTIES CAME IN EARLIER  THIS YEAR AND REQUESTED CERTAIN ORDERS THAT COULD NOT BE GIVEN ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS.  AND IN FACT AS I RECALL,  PETITIONER SOUGHT A SECOND EX PARTE APPLICATION.  THE  MATTER WAS SET FOR THE FAST TRACK OR THE SOLUTION-FOCUSED INTERVIEW PARDON, SOLUTION-FOCUSED EVALUATION ON JUNE  28.  UNFORTUNATELY, THIS COURT WAS UNAVAILABLE THAT AFTERNOON, AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS AN EMERGENCY FOR THE COURT SO I WAS UNAVAILABLE IN THE AFTERNOON IF I WANTED THE EVALUATION TO TAKE PLACE, SO THE PARTIES DIDN'T HAVE TO COME THROUGH THAT PART AGAIN.  AND SO WE CHECKED WITH MS. NAKAMATSU TO FIND OUT HER AVAILABILITY, FOUND OUT SHE WOULD BE AVAILABLE TODAY.  SO THAT'S WHY I'VE ASKED YOU TO COME BACK TODAY TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HEAR THE REPORT, AND FOR THE COURT TO THEN MAKE ORDERS.  SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE AT THIS TIME.

To begin with it was not "both parties"!  I had merely responded to my ex-wife's filing of a facetious demand for a Restraining Order (which was of course denied) AFTER SHE HAD ABDUCTED MY YOUNGEST SON AGAINST HIS WISHES!  This is probably the most important indication that the process was doomed to fail for my own and my family's experience from the outset.  The Judge did not attend Court on the date that she had herself set for the Hearing and then she allowed Nakamatsu to dictate the date the replacement hearing would be held. Whatever the needs of our Family were, came a far second to the needs of two Government employees.  

What Nakamatsu's postponing of the hearing for fifty five (55) days actually meant was, that I and my wife were not able to see my sons for more than two months during the first half of 2005.  Nor did we to get a summer vacation with them!  I tried to discover if Nakamatsu took any new assignments between June 28th and August 22nd, 2005, which would have meant that she could have set an earlier date, but the system does not allow poor people to do that!  The advice I received from her department was that I should retain a lawyer to file under the Freedom of Information Act to gain the information.  (Yet again proving beyond any doubt that without sufficient funds the individual is denied even access to government records that would allow him or her to defend his or her own children in the Land of the Fee.)  The Laws are obviously designed to benefit the rich, and deny the needs of the poor, and obviously save the "Process First" system time or cost!

Note:  After we left the the Evaluator's office my youngest son David was completely mystified and very angry that he was not being allowed to go home with me and, with tears in his eyes, he kept saying "but I told the lady I want to live with you and Joy"!  Being a father who loves his children and having to live with that terrible outcome, is very difficult, (and created a stress level far above what my Doctor had told me to avoid), as I am sure any parents who loves their children will appreciate and can probably associate with.  But that is "The System" that Judge Dobbs here casually defends. I often wonder how she would feel if some government bureaucrat prevented her from seeing her children for weeks on end on a whim? So the last time I saw my eleven year old son after we left Court, after the Judge had failed to show up, and after the "Solution Based Evaluation" by Nakamatsu, he was crying; and immediately after she learned that, his stepmother suffered what can only be described as a nervous breakdown and entered into a severe depression.  All contact between David and his stepmother had been denied to them for weeks by then - and then for another two months by the decision.  But why would "The System" ever do anything, or care about something, as human as that?  However, if Nakamatsu DID take any new assignments between June 28th and August 22nd, then I would claim that she was actively working for my ex-wife, or at the very least she was forcing her own anger and beliefs upon my family and thereby denying an old Haole father (me) his rights as a parent.

THE COURT:  MS. NAKAMATSU, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, PROCEED TO GIVE US FIRST OF ALL YOUR QUALIFICATIONS TO ACT AS SOLUTION-FOCUSED EVALUATOR.

THE WITNESS:  YES, YOUR HONOR.  AND IF I MAY, I WANT  TO NOTIFY THE COURT THAT AS I RECALL, MOTHER IN THE MATTER HAS DIFFICULTY WITH -- HAS A HEARING IMPAIRMENT, SO I WILL BE SPEAKING UP RATHER LOUDLY.  I WANTED TO NOTIFY THE   COURT.

Nakamatsu was outside of the Court with my ex-wife prior to the Hearing and witnessed her (and I would guess advised her to) remove her hearing aid before entering the Court.  And the plan obviously worked well - for feminist sympathy was immediately established with the Judge!

THE COURT:  I APPRECIATE YOUR TELLING ME THAT, AND I  WILL TRY TO SPEAK LOUDLY ENOUGH.  MS. GADOW? 

MS. GADOW:   GADOW.

THE COURT:  THANK YOU.

THE WITNESS:  IN REGARDS TO MY QUALIFICATIONS I HAVE A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN HUMAN DEVELOPMENT WITH AN  EMPHASIS IN MARRIAGE, FAMILY AND CHILD COUNSELING; A MASTER'S DEGREE IN CLINICAL SOCIAL WORK WITH AN EMPHASIS  IN MATERNAL CHILD HEALTH. I'VE BEEN LICENSED TO PRACTICE  IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SINCE 1991 AND I'M EMPLOYED  AS A CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATOR WITH THE SUPERIOR COURT OF  LOS ANGELES.

Nakamatsu had in fact only worked for the Los Angeles Superior Court since 2001 and not 1991 as she implies. (Resume)  Her claim to having an "emphasis in maternal child health" could also, I have been told, indicate that any form of "paternal" child health (or father/son relationship) is probably not something she knows or cares much about, and if so, it would obviously have placed me at a disadvantage from the outset!

THE COURT:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. NAKAMATSU.

MS. GADOW, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF  MS. NAKAMATSU ABOUT HER QUALIFICATIONS?

MS. GADOW:  NO,  I  DON'T.

 THE COURT:   THANK YOU.

MR. HATHAWAY BATES?

MR. HATHAWAY-BATES:  NO, YOUR HONOR.

How could I have any questions?  I had just heard her (a Government employee "supposed to be serving the people") swear in open Court to tell "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God", and, of course, no-one had ever given me a copy of her qualifications to review beforehand.

THE COURT:  MS. NAKAMATSU, IF YOU WOULD PROCEED THEN TO GIVE US YOUR REPORT AND THEN MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AFTERWARDS.

THE WITNESS:  YES, YOUR HONOR.  I CONDUCTED A SOLUTION-FOCUSED EVALUATION ON THE HATHAWAY-BATES MATTER ON JUNE THE 28TH, 2005. THE  INFORMATION I WILL PROVIDE IS LIMITED DUE TO THE NATURE AND CONSTRAINTS OF THE PROCESS.

Emphasis added

The way "The System" works in Liberal, Feminist, Politically Correct California is that my future, and my reputation, were reduced by the simple bureaucratic concept of an evaluation where it does not matter that the Evaluator herself admits is LIMITED DUE TO THE NATURE AND CONSTRAINTS OF THE PROCESS.  However, the Court sees nothing wrong that she would then go on to strip me of my legal rights as a father and brand me to be an abusive, lecturing, lying, alcoholic, chain-smoking, racist, dead-beat father, who often cannot feed them and makes Racist distinctions between his own children!  Without allowing any witnesses to be heard!

Under this ludicrous Family Court concept of validation that allows a father to be stripped of his right to be the father of his sons, I should be allowed to pilot passenger jets because I once dated a Flight Attendant!

THE WITNESS:  AT ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT IS A DISPUTED CUSTODY AND VISITATION PLAN FOR MATTHEW AND DAVID.  MATTHEW'S DATE OF BIRTH IS APRIL THE 23RD, 1988.  HE'S 17 YEARS OF AGE.  DAVID'S DATE OF BIRTH IS JUNE THE 4TH, 1994.  HE'S ELEVEN YEARS OF AGE.

Which of course is not true - MATTHEW'S CUSTODY HAD ALREADY BEEN AGREED and filed with the Court! And we were there only to rectify the crime of my ex-wife abducting David against the Orders of the Court!

Regarding my eldest son MATTHEW JOHN HATHAWAY-BATES I hereby agree to whatsoever he wishes. At the age he is today (17+) I was already serving in Her Majesties Forces in Africa and the Middle East and considered myself to be an adult.  I love Matthew dearly, but I believe that manipulation by his mother has created a situation that I cannot change until he faces the truth, the same manipulation that was used against his elder brother Raymond (my ex-wife’s eldest and natural son) before he was finally expelled from the Beverly Hills High School (two years older than any of his classmates), unable to pass his GED and having already served six months in Juvenile Detention for destruction of school property. 

Included in Papers filed on June 20th, 2005

THE COURT:  IS IT JUNE 9?

THE WITNESS:  OH, TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR ON MY PART.  I APOLOGIZE.  JUNE THE 9TH.

Which PROVES that there IS a copy of her Report.  The Judge obviously had a copy, but I HAVE NEVER BEEN GIVEN, OR SEEN, OR HELD IN MY HANDS A COPY OF THIS REPORT!  Although I had been led to believe that I had paid $250 to purchase a copy in advance of the Hearing!

THE WITNESS: THE PROCESS INCLUDED INDIVIDUAL OFFICE  INTERVIEWS WITH EACH PARENT AS WELL AS INDIVIDUAL OFFICE INTERVIEWS WITH THE CHILDREN (1).  IN ADDITION I BRIEFLY REVIEWED THE MOST RECENT  DOCUMENTS IN VOLUME 2 OF THE COURT FILE.  I ALSO REVIEWED DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE PARTIES (2), SCHOOL RECORDS FROM BEVERLY HILLS HIGH SCHOOL FROM MATTHEW; ALSO THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RECORDS FOR BOTH OF THE PARENTS.  COPIES I PROVIDE FOR THE COURT'S REVIEW (3).

Emphasis added 

"BRIEFLY REVIEWED" is an oxymoron; a "Review" is an ACT, it is a SUBJECTIVE VERB.  You can only REVIEW or NOT REVIEW something!  You cannot "briefly" review something, any more than you can "briefly" kill someone, "briefly" give birth, or "briefly" jump off a cliff, nor can a Judge "briefly" hear a case (although in my case this is exactly what happened).  To attach a descriptive adverb such as "briefly" can only be done by someone who does not fully understand English.  Nakamatsu reviewed the case file, or she did not!  From her total lack of knowledge of the evidence held in the Case File, I would guess that she DID NOT review it!

1  THIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE - I WAS THERE!

• Nakamatsu NEVER INTERVIEWED MY YOUNGEST SON DAVID ALONE!  She interviewed both of my sons together AFTER she had interviewed Matthew ALONE. 

• I swear on my Family's Honor that Nakamatsu told me during the interview that she had read the WHOLE Case File (in fact it was on her desk throughout the interrogation).

2  This is untrue!  Nakamatsu told me many times during the interview that she was "not allowed" to accept any evidence or review any of the documents that I offered for her to read during the interview that could support my claims that her accusations during her interrogation of me were erroneous!

3  I had never seen these copies, nor were they filed prior to the hearing.  How can evidence be used that affects my family and I be refused the right to see it or comment on it?

THE WITNESS:  IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THEY ARE UNREMARKABLE FOR BOTH; HOWEVER, BOTH PARTIES AGREE THAT FATHER WAS IN FACT DETAINED BRIEFLY BY THE BEVERLY HILLS POLICE DEPARTMENT AFTER AN INCIDENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN 1997. (4) THAT THIS — AND INDEED THIS WAS AN INCIDENT THAT INVOLVED SOME VIOLENCE.  FATHER MAINTAINS THAT HE WAS THE ACTUAL VICTIM IN THIS PARTICULAR INCIDENT. (5)

4   So Nakamatsu LED her report with something that had nothing to do with the matter in hand. Something from 1997!  Eight and a half years beforehand - totally ignoring all of the evidence in the case file!

5  Nakamatsu's tone of voice and body language while she stated that I had told her that I was the "actual victim" was condescending and sarcastic, (indicating that she not only believed that I lied to her about it but that I was also something of a wimp), but of course the Transcript cannot pick that up, even though the Judge most definitely did so.  ALSO, I did not, "maintain" anything!  THE FACT IS MY EX-WIFE ATTACKED ME!  THERE IS AMPLE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE FILE!  I tried to hand Nakamatsu copies of the witness's testimonies and the Police Report, after she asked me if I had ever been "arrested for public intoxication or spousal abuse", but she told me, as ever, that she could not read anything I wanted her to read, nor could she accept any "ex-parte" evidence from me!  Also, stating 'THIS PARTICULAR INCIDENT" in the tone she did, indicated that there were other incidents that I did not dispute!  Stacey Natividad, a neighbor who was present at the time of the incident, stated the following in her testimony to the Court a copy of which is in the Case File Nakamatsu stated that she had reviewed): 

In January of 1997 Holly came to our house saying that John had hit her. My mother told me to go downstairs and work on my homework and she went in with Holly.  Holly had already called the Police and although Holly cried and blamed John my mother said she did not look like someone who had been beaten.   Holly told her that John had smacked the back of her head once.   When John came home the Police arrested him. I could hear John asking the policewoman why he was being arrested and when she said it was for public intoxication I heard John say, "That is ridiculous, I am not drunk. Get a doctor to give me a blood test and that will prove it." They handcuffed John to the fence and then came and stood outside my window, which was open, and I heard the policeman say about John "He is not drunk.  He looks like he is the one who got beat up.  Did you see the bruises on his face? What is wrong with this woman?"  Then the policewoman said "We need to take him in now anyway." And then they took John to the Police Station.

(Included in Papers filed on June 20th, 2005)

Emphasis added

I was not even home at the time my ex-wife called the Police! (For as usual I had left after SHE had attacked ME), but she had called me at my office and established when I would be home before she called them!  I guess the reason she did it was that the previous time she had attacked me she had broken my nose and my glasses, and I had told her that the next time she attacked me I WOULD report it to the Police and bring charges against her, so she filed her version before I could do so  I guess.  She must also have fed them some pretty dramatic lies to cause them to overact when I did arrive home and to treat an old Englishman in a three piece suit as if he was a dangerous member of a Mafia hit squad; first forcing me to the ground to handcuff me and then handcuffing me to the fence!  The situation was also a little more complicated than that however, as several neighbors, after the affair had been going on for some time, were telling the Police that what they were doing was wrong and were getting somewhat agitated at the officer's treatment of me - I had lived in the home for more than fifteen years and all of my neighbors knew the abuse I suffered from my ex-wife - and at the end of the affair many of my neighbors were actually shouting at the Police to leave and to release me.  Also, I was actually in my own yard when I was forced to the ground and restrained and then handcuffed to the fence and told I was being charged with "PUBLIC" intoxication.  NO CHARGES WERE EVER FILED OF COURSE!

4  When I asked the Policeman why he was taking me to the Police Station, he told me that he was probably doing me a favor getting me away from "that woman". And although I asked for blood tests, breathalyzer tests, to be able to call an attorney, etc., etc.; well, as ever . . . .  Had Nakamatsu actually reviewed the Case File (as she stated under oath that she had done) (1) she would have known that the truth that she avoided including was on record.  Had Judge Ann Dobbs only read the Case File prior to taking the case, she would have known it as well. The embarrassment of being taken away in handcuffs, only to be released as soon as they had checked out the facts, never quite appeared fair to me.  My favorite suit was also destroyed in the process.

THE WITNESS:  I ALSO CONTACTED THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES.  DCFS REPORTED NO REFERRALS.  (6)  HOWEVER, THE CHILDREN INDICATE THAT CHILDREN'S SERVICES WAS INVOLVED EARLIER THIS YEAR AND THAT THEY WERE IN FACT  INTERVIEWED BY A CHILDREN'S SERVICES WORKER.  AND I WILL  DISCUSS THAT SHORTLY FURTHER. (7)

Emphasis added

6  THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO RECORD FOR NAKAMATSU TO USE AGAINST ME BECAUSE HER LIE JUST NEVER HAPPENED - SO - BUT SHE JUST GOES AHEAD AND INVENTS ONE and then blandly states that "the children" said that it happened?  Obviously the Judge was not listening attentively enough right then!

7  This is exactly how character assassination takes place - Nakamatsu had absolutely nothing that she could use against me in the all-encompassing records of today's society.  So she callously commits perjury and invents something that NEVER HAPPENED and then goes on to discuss it in a very "professional manner" (sic) as if it had really happened.  The overworked Judge missed it completely! 

Then Nakamatsu demanded a Gag Order, which means that no one can actually ever ask "the children" IF they had ever really said to her what she states that they did!  And the Judge did exactly what she was told to do!!

It got even worse later when Nakamatsu referred to her invention yet again, indicting it was already established as a fact!  Nakamatsu simply made up a false blot on my character and then used it to insult me with. AS YOU WILL READ LATER, NAKAMATSU ON MANY OCCASIONS IGNORED ACTUAL EVIDENCE AND WRITTEN PROOF, AND TESTIMONY GIVEN UNDER OATH, APPARENTLY FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN TO BE ABLE TO DESTROY MY CHARACTER.  In my experience racism always leads people into ignoring anything that may deny them their ability to righteously hate the victim that they have chosen - as happened in this case!

IN REGARDS TO DAVID, I WAS NOT ABLE TO OBTAIN  SCHOOL RECORDS FOR DAVID.  HOWEVER, NEITHER PARENT NOTED THAT DAVID WAS HAVING ANY PROBLEMS. (8)

 Emphasis added

David with his Stepmother their last Christmas together in 2004

Actually, I checked with James Hanson of the Beverly Hills School District after the Hearing and there is no record that Nakamatsu ever tried to obtain David's School Records and I was assured that in a Case like ours, had she done so they would have been provided without question or delay.

OBVIOUSLY THEREFORE THE EXISTING SITUATION WAS WORKING FOR DAVID - except where my ex-wife was fighting it!  BUT, NAKAMATSU THEN WENT ON TO STRIP ME OF ANY LEGAL RIGHTS OVER MY 11 YEAR OLD ENGLISH SON AND ORDERED THE JUDGE TO CHANGE THE CUSTODY, WHICH WAS OBVIOUSLY (AS SHE HAD JUST STATED) WORKING TO DAVID'S BENEFIT AT THE TIME!  Someone please explain it to me, for it makes absolutely no sense to me!

When Nakamatsu told me during her interrogation that she had no school records for David, I offered her copies of his last three school reports, but she refused to accept them - as usual - stating yet again that she could not consider any ex-parte evidence from me. 

So I attempted right then and there to explain the truth to the Court, and held up copies of David's Report Cards, but I was rudely refused the opportunity to do so, as you can see below.

9   THIS IS HOW CHARACTER ASSASSINATION TAKES PLACE - talk about a filing that was denied by the Court and then "conveniently" FORGET to mention the fact of my ex-wife ABDUCTING MY SONS AGAINST THE RULING COURT ORDERS FOR OVER A MONTH and make absolutely no mention of the abduction of my son David against his wishes!  Or even mention that Matthew had been continuously told by his mother to ignore Court Orders that he should come to me for tutoring twice a week for more than five years!

10  ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE! The first physical separation of my sons and I took place in March 1998, not in January 1997 - which was the official Separation date of the marriage!  Which Nakamatsu might have known had she actually read the Case File as she stated under oath that she had!

10-1  Nakamatsu fails to mention that both boys were also supposed to have dinner with me every Tuesday night, (which their mother refused unless I paid for it after December 1999) or that Matthew was supposed to come for tutoring two days a week.  - as I made a point of telling Nakamatsu!  She then later told the Judge that "Father contends that this is all about money for mother".

o.   If  Respondent is to be away overnight without the children during his scheduled time, children shall be with the Respondent.

Orders signed by Judge Isabel M. Cohen -  Filed: July 7th, 1998 – Page 4: Lines 14 thru 16

I suggest you read the above order again.  Every Police Officer who did, when I tried to enforce what the Judge had actually ordered, told me that it “made no sense” and therefore they were not able to enforce it.  Almost six months later when I managed to get back into Court I brought it up, and Stephen Gershman, my ex-wife's attorney, just blithely claimed that it was merely a “typo”, and promised to change it - which he finally did, more than a YEAR LATER!  This from a man who claimed more than twenty years of experience in Family Court? As ever, Judge Isabel Cohen had signed the Orders without me being allowed to approve them as to “form and content”.  My ex-wife always ignored this order, why not, no Judge is going to do anything about it!

It should have read (obviously):

o.   If PETITIONER is to be away overnight without the children during HER scheduled time, children shall be with the Respondent.

What Gershman's careless wording and Judge Cohen's neglect of her duty actually meant was that my sons were left alone with their immature brother Raymond for long periods of time over the years, (see: Stacey Natividad’s testimony to the Court).  On other occasions their mother left them with friends of hers I did not know, and without me being told where they would be, while she took off to lead her own life. (River rafting with her friends in Colorado, trips to Las Vegas and many trips to Hawaii, Mexico, Canada, etc., etc. – according to what my sons told me - using the money I paid for my sons to be safe). Stephen Gershman’s responses to my requests for information on where my children were, and with whom, went unanswered.

In my opinion it was merely something else that he and my ex-wife did deliberately and believed would scare me into giving them control of The Business Forum that they had no right to under the law, but demanded any way.  If it was just "a typo" how come he never caught it when he read and proofed (sic) the Orders before he filed them without allowing me to approve them as to "form and content"; and why did Judge Cohen sign off on such balderdash, especially considering that she knew I had not been given the opportunity to review them?  Having got away with it then, my ex-wife continues to do the same thing today.

I explained all of this to Nakamatsu - but as you will see she never mentions it once in her report!

11   It was not "THE PARTIES" it was what my ex-wife demanded, (and I was forced to agree to) so that I could at least get our sons back into school because she could not get them to attend school in the Los Angeles Unified School District.  emails from my ex-wife

12   THIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE!  I NEVER SAID IT!  And, the Case file that Nakamatsu swore under oath that she had read and that Judge Dobbs SHOULD have read according to her oath to the State of California proves it!  My ex-wife has only had Legal Custody regarding medical matters after Judge Arnold J. Gold awarded it to her in 2001.  AFTER I HAD A HEART ATTACK IN HIS COURT ROOM AND THEN WHILE I WAS BEING TRANSPORTED TO CEDARS SINAI HOSPITAL FOR HEART SURGERY, HE CONTINUED THE HEARING WITHOUT ME BEING ABLE TO BE PRESENT OR BE REPRESENTED!  JUDGE GOLD JUST GAVE HER THE RIGHT TO HAVE MY SONS CIRCUMCISED AGAINST MY RELIGIOUS BELIEVES THAT ANY CHILD BORN IN THE IMAGE OF GOD SHOULD NOT BE  MUTILATED!  The blackmail of my ex-wife threatening to have my sons mutilated if I did not agree to her demands for money should be easy for anyone to comprehend. (He did this after he read the forged emails making me look like an anti-Semitic Racist)  He therefore awarded Medical Legal Custody to my ex-wife when I was not there to argue against it; and the record shows that I have ALWAYS contested it.

13  Hearsay your Honor! From this point on Karen Nakamatsu becomes the advocate of my ex-wife's fictitious and facetious case and becomes the prosecutor against my own case.  She lies - she refuses to reference evidence in the Case File - and she commits perjury with no fear of being held to account for it.  Why should she?  She is a Government Employee, and she knows the Judge will never take to time to check the evidence in the file.  It is untrue that I made "disparaging remarks" to Matthew; (whatever "disparaging remarks" might mean, for she does not elaborate upon what she means by stating it).  Had Nakamatsu talked to Matthew's stepmother who had been caring for him five days a week, she could have ascertained that fact from the outset!  The truth is that my ex-wife has never witnessed me talking with Matthew in 8 years!

PLEASE NOTE:  It is the "casual"  reference Nakamatsu makes here with the words "Father" and "his drinking" however, that is character assassination, BECAUSE IT IS NOT TRUE, and if Nakamatsu actually did review the Case File, as she previously stated under oath that she had (1), then SHE WOULD KNOW THAT EVERY WITNESS WHO HAS ACTUALLY TESTIFIED IN COURT UNDER OATH DURING THIS CASE HAS REFUTED MY EX-WIFE'S CONTINUOUS AND FICTITIOUS CLAIMS THAT I AM "A DRUNK"!  But then, I  doubt that "The System" will ever investigate the matter, or ever actually do anything about it.  The woman should lose her license to practice as a Court Evaluator and be fired, but you know and I know she will be destroying lives for years without any fear of being held to account.

My ex-wife has been trying to classify me as an "abusive alcoholic" and "a racist" for more than ten years now, (which seems to be a very successful case winning strategy in the overworked Los Angeles Family Court for a woman, even if it is a completely false and calculated lie, to which every witness that has ever appeared during the case has testified to under oath!)   Today she continuously tells anyone who will listen, including my 12 year old son David, who knows the truth that I am not, that I am a drunk!  However, she also calls him "stupid white boy" whenever he tells her that he has never seen me intoxicated, so he understands the situation, thanks be to God.

In a Letter to the Court, Bruce Clay, a business partner and good friend for more than twenty years stated:

As for the latest hearing where Mr. Hathaway-Bates was accused of being an abusive alcoholic racist by everything that Karen Nakamatsu said - let me state that nothing could be further from the truth. I have known John and his family for more than twenty years and Karen Nakamatsu is absolutely wrong!  I understand that there is a strong "Hawaiian Heritage" tie with Ms. Gadow, but allowing this bias to result in an inaccurate and slanted report to the court is unacceptable, and is certainly grounds for re-examination.  

Emphasis added

Blaine McManus, who is the father of David's best friend also disagrees with what Nakamatsu states: 

From Blaine McManus's letter to the Court:

Karen Nakamatsu also implies continually that John is an abusive alcoholic. I have been to his home many times and spent time with him over several years and can honestly say I have never seen him intoxicated. Her descriptions of him are completely opposite of the man I have known for years.

Emphasis added

Another of David's friends parents Joe Safier stated in his letter to the Court:

Jonathan Hathaway-Bates shared with me the transcript of the hearing where he lost custody of his son.