Blog Archives

Letter to SJC

2/5/2010

                                                                                                               Feburary 5, 2010
Chief Justice for Administration and Management
Administrative Office of the Trial Court
Two Center Plaza - Fifth Floor
Boston, MA 02108

Honorable Robert A. Mulligan

     I write to you today to seek information that the staff at the Lawrence Probate Court has refuse to give or even answer. Again on Jan 7, 2010
I had a hearing in regards to a request to record Judge Mary Manzi contempt hearings. Judge Manzi allowed my request to record and added her own stipulations, but has never sent out her order.

Part of her order included that I give proper notice to each party I wished to record, She would release her dockets three week before the date I wish to record,so that I can give proper notice to the parties. Behind the Scene thanks Judge Mary Manzi for allowing such request.

At this hearing and before the hearing, I was asked by Jean, Judge Manzi clerk, Not to fax over my request as it wasn't professional, She did say "you can always hand deliver it" when I reply " wouldn't have a record of it" I now hand delivered my request after hearing Judge Manzi concerns about the rights of the parities being seen on video, I recommended to provide the parties with a release form and the court would get a copy for their records.

To date I have yet to receive that ruling by Judge Mary Manzi, which puts my request to be put on hold, as the only other order issued by Chief Justice Paula Carey is allowing me to have access to the Department of Revenue Dockets, two days prior to a DOR contempt hearings. Under that direction I was allowed to summit four case to which I wanted to record, and the Judge who would be hearing that case would make his/her decision at the time the parties were present.

Behind the Scene thanks Judge John Cronin for allowing me to be heard on those cases I picked, although those cases were settled with DOR and I was unable to record, I was allow to be heard.

A week later I inquired with Judge Manzi clerk Jean, who stated the Judge wasn't in, but was very helpful by making a call to probate office downstairs. I thank Jean for helping in getting the docket for Judge Manzi to me.

On February 1, 2010, Judge Manzi did not acknowledge my request to record, Nor did she denied my request. when I asked Jean to check on why I haven't received the order, Jean stated , " After the hearing you wrote to the Chief Justice asking for another thing, So by you asking for another thing, the request changed and the judge was not required to respond" At 9:43AM Judge Manzi enters the court room made eye contact with me, but did not acknowledge my request to record all her contempt hearings, she left the bench and did not return back until 10:55, At this point she calls the field case to approach.

I now hand deliver on Tuesday February 2, 2010 to Jean in court room 10, my request to record all contempt hearings, Jean responded by asking if I had given proper service to the parties, I replied "I'm not seeking to record the parties, Only the Judge" This request is for Thursday February 4, 2010 Dor with Judge Manzi, and again repeated that I wasn't looking to record the parties. She took my request and gave no further response not even a you welcome.

On that same day I inquired about the use of the city own parking lot across from the court house, which points directly to Judge Manzi court room, I had asked court officer Mario about the lot.

It's important to note that the shades in Judge Manzi court room 10 are always up, It is also important to note that on that same day Judge Manzi had send down a court officer to the city owned parking lot and asked to speak with the manager of the lot, and had him go up to the Judge.

That same day I had also spoken to the Mayor's office Chief of staff, and the captain of the LPD, and informed them of my wishes to record from the roof top of the parking lot.

On Thursday, February 4, 2010 I arrive at the Lawrence Probate court at 8:15 leaving my equipment in the car as I already knew my request if heard would be denied. At 10:10 AM Judge Manzi enters the court room and calls me up to address my request. At this point Judge Manzi makes reference to a letter from Chief Justice Paula Carey in regard to recording Contempt hearings with DOR, Where Chief Justice Carey allowed me to pick any four cases, I wish to record. This request was not in front of Judge Manzi as pointed to her by me, as the only request in front of Judge Manzi was my request to record her and point the camera at her.
Again Judge Manzi stated I didn't follow the rules and denied my request. Not looking to upset her anymore than what she already was, I simply informed her that I will appeal her decision to a higher court.

My attempts to reach out to Chief Justice Paula Carey to direct her Judges to follow the rules has not worked and we seek your intervention in stopping this abuse. It's important to note, that I have requested to record Judge Amy Blake, Judge MaryAnn Sahagan, Judge John Cronin, And Judge Mary Manzi, We were seeking to compare stats on these Judges, before reporting. Judges Manzi by not following the rules, have given the expression that these stats are correct, and Judge Manzi seem to think that she is exempt from following the rules.

I would have you know, Judge Manzi was my Judge handling my divorce case since 1998, Although I may not have agreed with some of her rulings, I have never questioned her ruling by appealing or complaining.

My request to record is to compare and educate as I have always told the courts, It is the court who feels threaten by my request, and by doing so, have given the indication that the concern of the public must be true and that the data provided is undisputedable.

If the Family and Probate Court were open to transparent, then my numerous of request would have been allowed.

My show is dedicated to holding government accountable for their actions to the taxpayers of the Commonwealth, and the family and probate and it's Judges are not exempt.

Again under SJC court rules under c.213, s.3 As this is an administrative concern.

I'm not seeking "legal inquiry", I are demanding the lawful exercise of my rights....

Where in the Constitution is the power granted to a judge to deny to a citizen their right to record a litigation?

There isn't. This "power" is not even in the "penumbra" or shadow of the Constitution.

I want to thank you in advance for your response and your intervention to this matter

Hector Montalvo
Producer/ Director/Host

19 Comments

Judge Mary Manzi orders shades down

2/4/2010

6 Comments

Judge Manzi orders court officer to close shades in court room.

After learning that Behind the Scene would be recording from the roof top of the city parking lot across from the court house, where it is open to the public, Judge manzi orders all shades down in her court room.

Why is Judge Manzi hiding? Cause she should, not only should she hide she should resign first then hide.

Behind the scene can show why this Judge should be in Jail.
Who's helping her waste your tax $$? Stay tune

6 Comments

Please Resign Paula

2/3/2010

0 Comments

Chief Justice Paula Carey,
Probate And Family Court
Two Center Plaza
Boston, MA 02108

CC/ Chief Justice Rober Mulligan
Administrative Office Of the Trial Court
Two Center Plaza Fifth Floor
Boston, MA 02108

     Chief justice Paula Carey

    I write to you today to inform you that I have found YOU and YOUR office incompetent of handling request made by me in regards to the issue of recording in court. Although I will say, that you have left those decisions to the judges that I wish to record, Those same Judges seem to ignore the very same rules you are responsible to enforce. Your position as Chief Justice of the Probate and Family court seems to be more wasteful spending on the Commonwealth taxpayers by you choosing to ignore the complaints.

If your Judges are just going to ignore you, as it has been prov-en and reported back to you and your staff, then it would appear to me, that your position as Chief Justice is not needed, if you allow this to countine.

As Chief Justice of the Probate and Family court, and under your watch, You have failed in your job to protect our children, due process, equal protection, and the laws that you and your Judges have taken an oath to protect.

You have failed to answer the many calls for change and reform from Victims, leaders, groups, and my show.   I call for you to do the right thing and submit your letter of Resignation to Chief Justice Robert Mulligan.

As a Independent Candidate for State Representative, as a producer director and host of Behind the Scene, and for the many Family Victims created under your watch, Your resignation should be put in immediately.

You have prov en that you can not work Bi-Partisan with any party or any group. Should you decide not to resign What steps will you take and when will you take them, To resolve the issues faced by many individuals who are entering your Probate and Family Court?

I want to thank you in advance for doing the right thing for the Commonwealth.

Hector Montalvo
Producer/ Director/Host
Behind The Scene with Hector Montalvo

0 Comments

My letter to Justice Mulligan

2/2/2010

2 Comments

Chief Justice Mulligan

     I was hoping not to have to get your office involved but have no other choice. I write to you today in hope that you can help with enforcing SJC rule 1:19. This rule came to me from Chief Justice Paula Carey's Office, which Joan Kenny was the person to respond to my request to record at the Family and Probate courts.

For months I have been back and forth with Chief Justice Paula Carey's office in regards to this issue. Per Chief Justice Paula Carey, she made it clear to me that any request to record must be approved by the Judge hearing those cases, and only those Judges can approve my request.

I have been asked to follow the rules, I have been asked not to email my request, I been asked not to fax my request, I have been told I can record, but no order is ever issued. Only 2 Judges has done their job, even though they have denied my request, I thank Judge Amy Blake for responding to my request to record a case in front of her, She heard my request, ruled on my request, denied, and submitted her denial in writing to me.

The other Judge is Judge Maryann Sahagan, again even though she denied my request, she acknowledge the request by calling me up to the bench to address my request.

If every Judge would do this, I wouldn't have to write to you.
On January 7, 2010 I was taking notes in court room 9 Lawrence Probate Court, in front of Judge John Cronin hearing contempt's for the Department Of Revenue (DOR) when Jean Judge Manzi clerk in court room 10, stuck her head in and waived me over to court room 10, When I get there Judge Manzi comes in and takes the bench, She is addressing my request to record her contempt cases that following Monday.

Judge Manzi approved my request to record, but gave me instructions that she wanted the parties to the case to be served with my request, I explain to Judge Manzi at the hearing, that the issue of getting the dockets two days before a hearing would make it impossible to give notices. Judge Manzi ordered that I be allow to get a copy of her docket 3 weeks prior to her cases in which I wish to record.

That same day I sent out a letter to Chief Justice Paula Carey's office in regards to Judge Manzi concerns, I believe I have and in many attempts, try to resolve the courts concern to the parties in a case. I in turn asked the court to allow me to record, and at no time will the camera be moved or be pointed to any par tie in a case, and that such camera would only be pointed at the Judges bench at all time, before, during, and after each case.

I feel that audio is already made public in a court hearing and the public has the right to go and get a copy of the recording. Chief Justice Paula Carey is quoted "I am open to having a open and transparent court" but limits the amount of cases I can record. Chief Justice Carey has failed in enforcing that her Judges reply to my request and to rule on my request, and to issue written finding to my request, approve or deny my request, as they would any other Media or person.

I have followed the rules which was provided to me, I have given notice to the court in a timely manner, I have been asked to give notice to the parties, I have attempted to address the issue of privacy, Yet restrictions are made on me, For example The docket for DOR is not made available to me until two days before a Department of Revenue contempt days, Then I have to pick the 4 cases I wish to record, The Judge then makes the decision when the case is being heard. I have asked Chief Justice Paula Carey, to inform her staff and her Judges to respond to my request to record, yet it still goes ignored or their reply comes back with the attitude like Joan Kenny had and wrote two weeks ago.

Chief Justice Mulligan, I write not only as a producer/director/host of my show "Behind the Scene with Hector Montalvo", I also write to you as a Candidate for State Representative in this coming election, I seek to work with your office in a bi-Partisan way to address these issue.

I look forward to your response.

Hector Montalvo
Producer/ Director/Host
Behind The Scene with Hector Montalvo

2 Comments

major report on coverup of DV against men

2/1/2010

9 Comments

Amid the media frenzy over Tiger Woods and Bengals receiver Chris Henry, a key aspect of both stories slipped through the cracks: Like millions of other men, Woods and Henry were -- allegedly at least -- the victims of domestic violence perpetrated by their wives or girlfriends. Beyond its brutal physical and psychological costs, domestic violence against men exacts a cruel economic toll at the personal, societal and national levels.

For the most part, the media, authorities and average citizens see domestic violence as a crime that is committed by men and victimizes women. Consequently, funding to combat the problem has overwhelmingly been spent on programs that support women.

Widely Ignored Problem

And yet, more than 200 survey-based studies show that domestic violence is just as likely to strike men as women. In fact, the overwhelming mass of evidence indicates that half of all domestic violence cases involve an exchange of blows and the remaining 50% is evenly split between men and women who are brutalized by their partners.
Part of the reason that this problem is widely ignored lies in the notion that battered males are weak or unmanly. A good example of this is the Barry Williams case: Recently, the former Brady Bunch star sought a restraining order against his live-in girlfriend, who had hit him, stolen $29,000 from his bank account, attempted to kick and stab him and had repeatedly threatened his life.

It is hard to imagine a media outlet mocking a battered woman, but E! online took the opportunity to poke fun at Williams, comparing the event to various Brady Bunch episodes. Similarly, when Saturday Night Live ran a segment in which a frightened Tiger Woods was repeatedly brutalized by his wife, the show was roundly attacked -- for being insensitive to musical guest Rihanna, herself a victim of domestic violence.

Lack of Research

Sometimes it is impossible to ignore the problem, but when domestic violence against men turns deadly -- as in the case of actor Phil Hartman -- the focus tends to shift to mental illness. The same can be said of the Andrea Yates case, which many pundits presented as the story of how an insensitive husband can drive a wife to murder.

Much of the information on domestic violence against men is anecdotal, largely because of the lack of funding to study the problem. Although several organizations explore domestic violence, the biggest single resource is the Department of Justice, which administers grants through its Office on Violence Against Women.

For years, the DOJ has explicitly refused to fund studies that investigate domestic violence against men. According to specialists in this field, the DOJ recently agreed to cover this problem -- as long as researchers give equal time to addressing violence against women.

First National Study

Researchers Denise Hines and Emily Douglas recently completed the first national study to scientifically measure the mental and social impact of domestic violence on male victims. Interestingly, their research was funded by the National Institutes of Mental Health, not the DOJ. Not only does this demonstrate the lack of resources for researchers of this issue, but it also suggests that male battering is perceived as a mental health issue, not a crime.

This decriminalization of domestic violence against men affects research conclusions. While survey-based studies have found that men and women commit domestic violence in equal numbers, crime-based studies show that women are far more likely to be victimized. This inconsistency begins to make sense when one considers that man-on-woman violence tends to be seen through a criminal lens, while woman-on-man violence is viewed more benignly.

A recent 32-nation study revealed that more than 51% of men and 52% of women felt that there were times when it was appropriate for a wife to slap her husband. By comparison, only 26% of men and 21% of women felt that there were times when it was appropriate for a husband to slap his wife. Murray Straus, creator of the Conflict Tactics Scale and one of the authors of the study, explained this discrepancy: "We don't perceive men as victims. We see women as being more vulnerable than men."

Kneed In The Groin

This trend becomes particularly striking when one considers the 1996 case of Minnesota Vikings quarterback Warren Moon, who tried to restrain his wife after she threw a candlestick at his head and kneed him in the groin. Subsequently charged with spousal abuse, he was only acquitted after his wife admitted that she attacked him -- and that her wounds were self-inflicted. Ironically, her admission of fault did not result in charges being brought against her.

While Moon's trial was particularly high profile, his situation is actually very common. In fact, studies have found that a man who calls the police to report domestic violence is three times more likely to be arrested than the woman who is abusing him.

The mainstream perception of domestic violence also impacts the resources that are available to battered men. For example, the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women, the only national toll-free hot line that specializes in helping male victims of domestic violence, has faced numerous roadblocks in its search for funding. In Maine, where the helpline is based, the surest route to funding is through membership in the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence.

On A Shoestring

But, according to Helpline director Jan Brown, the Coalition refused to even issue the program an application for membership, effectively denying it access to funding. Today, 45 Helpline volunteers field 550 calls per month, 80% of which are from men or people who are looking for help on behalf of a man. Operating with a yearly budget of less than $15,000, it provides intensive training to its workers and offers victims housing, food, bus tickets and a host of other services.

The Helpline's sheltering services are informal and ad hoc, largely because its lack of access to funding makes a shelter financially impossible. In fact, of the estimated 1,200 to 1,800 shelters in the U.S., only one -- the Valley Oasis shelter in Antelope Valley, Calif. -- provides a full range of shelter services to men. And, on average, less than 10% of OVW funds allocated to fight domestic violence are used to help men.

For male victims of domestic violence, the legal system can become another tool for abuse. As in the Moon case, battered men are often likely to find themselves arrested, even when they are the ones who call the police. And, even after the arrest, the process of incarceration, restraining orders, divorce court and child custody hearings continue to disadvantage men.

A High Cost

Restraining orders are a particularly difficult hurdle. Radar Services, a watchdog organization, estimates that approximately 85% of the roughly 2 million temporary restraining orders that are issued every year are made against men. In many states, the requirements for an order are exceedingly vague: In Oregon, for example, a "fear" of violence is sufficient for a restraining order, while Michigan issues them to protect family members against "fear of mental harm."

But there's nothing vague about the effect of restraining orders: They often turn men out of their homes, deny them access to children and result in further personal costs as millions of men have to find new places to live, hire lawyers and pay other expenses. For some men, as Hines and Brown point out, the legal system gives abusive wives and girlfriends tools to continue attacks even after their relationships end.

As Straus notes, "The preponderance of [domestic violence] resources should be made available to women. They are injured more often, are more economically vulnerable, and are often responsible for the couple's children. That having been said, more resources need to be made available to men."

There is no doubt that domestic violence against men can be reduced; the domestic violence initiatives of the past 40 years have brought a hidden crime to light and provided protection for millions of women. The next step is to admit that domestic violence is not a male or female problem, but rather a human problem, and that a lasting solution must address the cruelty -- and suffering -- of both sexes.

www.dailyfinance.com/story/a-hidden-crime-domestic-violence-against-men-is-a-growing-probl/19297449/

9 Comments

Forward>>

Letter to SJC

Judge Mary Manzi orders shades down

Please Resign Paula

My letter to Justice Mulligan

major report on coverup of DV against men

Behind the Scene with Hector Montalvo

Archives

Categories