Child Murder
Shock as Prosecutors Drop Rape Charge Against Rebecca Helen Elder
PROSECUTORS have surprisingly dropped all charges against a woman accused of orally raping a man.
Rebecca Helen Elder, 39, of Parkside, appeared in the District Court today.
She had previously pleaded not guilty to one count of aggravated serious criminal trespass in a place of residence, and one count of rape.
Prosecution documents, filed with the court, alleged both offences took place at a suburban house between September 20 and September 23 last year.
They claimed Ms Elder broke into a house while its male occupant was lawfully on the premises.
They further alleged she broke in with the intention of committing a further offence of rape.
Ms Elder was last month ordered to stand trial, during which prosecutors would allege she raped the man by performing an act of oral sex on him without his consent.
European Court of Human Rights does a backflip: Biological fathers’ lawsuits dismissed
Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights: Biological fathers have no right to recognition of paternity if the mother lives with another man.
In 2010 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that German legislation prohibiting biological fathers from having any contact with their child without the biological mother’s consent was discriminating against fathers and a violation of the men’s human rights.
Refer to article: European Court Bolsters Fathers’ Rights
However, the European Court of Human Rights has just announced a backflip on its previous position, now claiming a ludicrous exception to this ruling by removing the parental rights of the biological father merely because the mother has moved in with another man.
Its a bizarre case of one step forward, ten steps backward for fathers all around the world, and this particular decision exemplifies the entrenched discrimination against biological fathers at every level of the legal system.
Sole Custody and Another Toddler Murder – Mother’s Boyfriend Faces Court
THE grave of toddler Brendan-Junior Nathan Williams is marked with a small white cross, colouring textas, toy cars, a glass butterfly and a picture of a bubbly little boy with an infectious smile.
A love heart and two hand prints are pressed into the fresh soil that marks his final resting place. Brendan, 2, was buried last Tuesday, almost two months after he died on January 15 from injuries.
Today, a 23-year-old man – the de facto husband of Brendan’s mother – who was not the child’s biological father, faces court charged with murdering Brendan at the family’s Melrose Park home.
Police arrested him on Saturday but have released few details about their allegations.
They have sealed off a converted-garage room at the home, where Brendan lived with his mother, her boyfriend and two caged pythons.
Brendan was rushed to Flinders Medical Centre in a car by his mother and her partner about 5am on January 14, three hours after the couple returned home from a southern suburbs hotel.
When Abortion is not Enough: Women’s Rights Reaches New Low
Editor: KILLING newborn babies should be allowed if the mother wishes, Australian philosophers have argued in a prestigious journal, however their whole argument is premised on the notion that mothers ‘own’ children, and this property is theirs solely to decide on matters as important as life or death.
The role, rights and responsibilities of the fathers and other family members is ignored, perhaps denoting that these supposed philosophers are engaging in something other than open-minded scientific debate. Perhaps this discussions has something to do with the growing number of women being persecuted for filicide, the murder of the children, especially at the point of birth. We in Australia are quite familiar we a particularly high profile case of a sports personality who killed her new born child because it was expected to interfere with her sports career.
Perhaps in the well tried fashion of the likes of Jen McIntosh, this publication’s true purpose is to provide legal leverage to such mothers, in order to avoid prison terms for killing new born babies.
Its quite interesting that such leniency does not seem to be extended to the father in this philosophical discussion.
Women bark, Men bite. The Apologist View of Child Murder
Editor: The below article is another piece of fanciful writing from a well-known journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald, Adele Horin, who can always be relied upon to creatively re-interpret the facts to absolve females of the same crimes that men are vilified for.
This insulting commentary on the automatic culpability of men in cases of child murder, even when the murderer is the mother, and the ”acceptability” of the murder of children, when committed by the mother, is a sad indictment on the extent that these feminist ideologues go to to sanitise all female mis-conduct, even at the expense of the best interests of children.
Horin relies upon a small sample of Child Murders, and selective interpretations of the reasons behind these murders, to paint a Mother’s murder of a child as an almost Saint-Like endeavour, worthy of praise, not condemnation.
But of course she does not afford men anything like the same type of sympathy, because Fathers after-all only murder children for selfish reasons.
New Bill to add Non-Discrimination Provision to Child Custody Law
SALT LAKE CITY-USA — Julie Anderson gulped back tears to explain to state lawmakers why they need to amend Utah’s child custody statute.
The Andersons believe had their son, Jared, had been awarded custody of his 3-year-old daughter Aubree Jo, the child would not have died in a car accident with her impaired mother behind the wheel. Toxicology tests found Oxycontin and marijuana in Brandi Stilke’s system when the single-car accident occurred on Feb. 23, 2011, in Harrisville.
“If we had been a bit more diligent, perhaps, it wouldn’t have happened,” Anderson told members of House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Standing Committee Tuesday afternoon.
Anderson testified on behalf of HB88, which would add to Utah’s divorce statute a statement that the court may not discriminate against a parent based on age, race, color, national origin, religious preference or gender.
Mother Murders Children – Sole Custody Takes Three More Children’s Lives
THE heartbroken Hobart father of two children killed by their mother in murder-suicide in Melbourne will always be haunted by the knowledge he missed out on their final years.
Dominic Maher yesterday said he felt let down by a system that had prevented him from seeing son Matthew, 11 and daughter Melanie, 13, for three years before they died.
Police believe mother Kylie Fowler, 36, argued with the children’s older half sister Sammantha Fowler, 18, before killing all three children, setting fire to the house and committing suicide.
Mr Maher, of Chigwell, said he had spent years locked in court battles with Ms Maher, but when it consistently decided in her favour, he eventually moved to Tasmania.
He been preparing a video for his children explaining why he had lost contact with them which he planned to hand to them on their 18th birthday.
Israel Takes Steps To Reduce Discrimination Against Divorced Fathers
Jerusalem — January 20, 2012 …. For many divorced fathers in Israel, the declaration yesterday by Israel Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman that divorced parents must now share custody of children, may have come too late. Neeman has accepted recommendations by the Schnit Committee that joint parental custody be ordered in divorce cases involving young children, which the law defines as those up to age 6. Until now, most divorced fathers became visitors, being limited to seeing their children only a few hours a week.
As the new law comes into affect, thousands of dads in Israel would have lost any opportunity of fatherhood due to the fact that their children have already grown up or that their children suffer from PAS – Parental Alienation Syndrome. With PAS the children become alienated against the father as the mother has pushed him away and brainwashed the children that he is of no worth, or perhaps even bad for whatever reason she creates.
Fraud in Australia’s plan to reduce violence against women
The 2009 Australian project a ‘Time for Action: The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021′, was approved for implementation by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). The Plan, which is split into several parts, puts forth recommendations for new legislation, changes to judicial processes, requests for funding and ideas for domestic programs targeted at reducing domestic and sexual violence against women. The advisory council has some powers to implement programs through the Office of Women among other agencies, but much of what the government funded program calls for requires approval by Parliament.
The entire premise of the National Plan was underpinned by the belief in this statement:“While a small proportion of men are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the majority of people who experience this kind of violence are women in a home, at the hands of men they know.â€[27-pg1] But a quick examination of the statistics and data shows a much different picture to the rather sweeping indictment of Australian men the National Council paints.
Another Bridge Protest Against Disgraceful Child Custody laws
A un-named man who was charged over a risky protest against Australia’s Child Custody laws on Brisbane’s Story Bridge, has walked free from court on bail.
Police sought to have bail conditions imposed on the 31-year-old Ormeau man, who was charged with performing an unregulated high risk activity, but the request was denied.
Lawyers acting for the man said he had made his point through the high-profile protest against Australia’s discriminatory child custody laws, however he did not intend to repeat the activity.
The man was bailed to appear again in court on December 19.
According to statements made by the man, a father of 3 who has spend over $88,000  to gain visitation to his children, his protest was against the Australian Family Law Courts and their complete disregard for the rights of children.
