First of all, I am not an attorney, but my blog allows me to voice my opinion. You, the reader, do not have to agree with it, however, I encourage you to examine some of my material and form your own conclusions. Don’t put me into the equation, just examine the facts.
Before Judge Simpson was appointed by Governor Otter as a District Judge in this area, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho he chaired the Family and Children in the Courts Supreme Court Committee. He drafted material that has now become an integral part of our legal processes through a pilot project home to District I. (Click about three times to bypass the form to get to the document) He may still be the chair, I don’t really know for sure, the judiciary site is not regularly updated. However, it is my opinion that when judges start to offer slippery slopes to the public that waive our rights to appeal and to the rules of evidence that we are also waiving our consitutional rights, because in Idaho there is no public input when these committees decide to change and form their own rules that override our Idaho statutes.
Waiver of the Rules of Evidence for Informal Custody Trial & Consent to Informal Custody Trial.
I am not sure when Judge Simpson married Jonelle Timlin PhD., but I do know that in 2006 they were busy working on waiving the Idaho Court Rules of Evidence in custody cases together. Today Mrs. Simpson is on the Idaho Supreme Court Wellness Committee. Again, this is my opinion – I think this relationhip poses a a HUGE conflict of interest in our Courts.
2006 Children and Family in the Courts Committee – Excerpt
Family Needs Assessment Pilot Project. Judge Simpson referred the committee to the custody toolbox outline located on page 174 and the protocol for the family needs assessment on pages 124 through 125 of committee materials. Judge Simpson reported that Dr. Jonelle Timlin, Ph.D. meets with the family for interviews and determines strengths and weaknesses of the parties as well as the needs of the children. Dr. Timlin provides recommendations regarding the needs of the children but does not make custody recommendations. (emphasis added) The goal of the project is to give the court enough information, including family background and recommendations regarding children’s needs to assist the court in making a decision when parents cannot agree. The protocol encourages parties that want to move into mediation with the information presented from the assessment to further negotiate an agreement, thus discouraging further judicial involvement
In 2008, Judge Simpson was still working on waiving our rights, but his wife was no longer mentioned in the family and courts minutes (just the wellness committee minutes.) Excerpt from family and the courts minutes:
3. Family Needs Assessment Pilot Project: Janet Meserve provided an update on the project and reported on the survey results she received from the judges that had participated in the First District Family Needs Assessment pilot project. There was discussion that this project is a useful tool in high conflict cases and is primarily used by pro se parties and when parties are low income and cannot afford a full custody evaluation. Chairman Simpson (emphasis added) mentioned that the Family Needs Assessment is different from an evaluation in that custody recommendations are not made. Corrie Keller made a motion to form a subcommittee to develop standards, guidelines and statewide training for the Child and Family Needs Assessment. Linda Wright seconded the motion and the motion carried. The subcommittee will consist of: Judge Barbara Buchanan (Chair), John Sahlin and Janet Meserve.
The public might think that changing divorce/custody laws is minor, but really it’s just a stepping stone to anything our Judiciary wants to change without a vote or public input/hearing. They are doing it. They have messed with other rules like the ICAR 32 which makes it more difficult to get records. Anything over 2 hrs of labor is going to cost you some big bucks and believe me - most of it will take at least two hours or more of labor.
Rule 16(p). Informal Custody Trial.
(1) An Informal Custody Trial is an optional alternative trial procedure that is voluntarily agreed to by the parties, counsel and the court to try child custody and child support issues. The model requires that the application of the Idaho Rules of Evidence and the normal (emphasis added) question and answer manner of trial be waived.
Once the waiver is obtained (more emphasis added) the matter proceeds to trial by consent as follows:
You sign your rights away with very simple documents that literally locks you OUT without a choice especially if you don’t have an attorney or any money. Who offers the waiver? Some rich spouse wants to put the boots to his poor unsuspecting spouse who didn’t stockpile any money – guess who is getting railroaded?
Sign here – a real Witch Hunt of a legal document at the hands of Judge Simpson.
Really, I would not have a problem with Judge Simpson if he would just get his wife off the Idaho Supreme Court Committees and quit messing with the Idaho Court Rules of Evidence. That’s not much to ask for and if you don’t agree with my opinion, that’s okay. You can always go ahead and waive your rights anytime you want, including your vote. Just how informal do you want to make our courts? Just say’n.
Recent Comments