Time for now-famous Blog to call out the shot caller of the criminal enterprise known as Family Section of the Connecticut Bar Association, Alexander Cuda, a highly respected family law attorney, who publishes and speaks, provides leadership in the family law community, a top family lawyer in Connecticut. The Law Tribune anointed him ‘NEW LEADER”. He studied Latin at Cornell, Law at Tulane, has deviant interest in ‘sexuality and the law’, lives in Easton with his family who does not realize the evil darkness of his practice.
Racketeering is organized crime where perps set up victims in coercive, extortionary schemes to repeatedly collect ill gotten profit. Racketeering is an organized criminal act where perps offer a service that will not be put into effect, offer a service to solve a nonexistent problem, or offer a service that solves a problem that would not exist without the racket. This is done in Connecticut family court involving lawyers of the ‘family section’ extorting payments from parents for the fraud of selling zealous advocacy in a fabricated custody fight for the sole purpose of extracting payments from the victims. The state will issue the ‘no-fault’ divorce for free, without involvement of members of ‘family section’, but Cuda’s RACKETEERING operation generates huge fees for members of the criminal enterprise. A crucial element of lawyer racketeering involves judges who entertain the fabricated and unnecessary disputes over children. The judges are paid to adjudicate claims not permitted by law to stoke expensive litigation. Judges, being regulators of the Bar, protect the illegal scheme, ignore statute, and take kickbacks for benefiting the racketeers under the direction of Alexander Cuda. The racket has protection of extended sovereign immunity of the individual GAL, conferred by high court judges, not by the people’s will. The model of operation and protection reflects the structure of jewish criminal gangs like Purple and Murder Incorporated.
The evidence of the racketeering operation is evident in the lawyer/judge collusion to thwart state law requiring ‘active and consistent’ involvement of both parents in the lives of children. The common isolation orders expose the criminal element that defeats law to produce ill gotten gains for lawyers. Denying visitation is beyond jurisdiction of the family court, for the State does not bring a claim of child protection, yet judges like Coleman, Grossman, Adelman, Wetstone, Munro, Solomon, Ficeto, Schofield, Heller, Stewart, Truglia, Goodrow, Bozzuto, Olear, Prestley, Epstein routinely make orders denying hugs from mother. An inhumane, but criminally profitable defiance of law, as §46b-56(b) prohibits parent-child isolation. Settled case law from 1902 convicts today’s ‘family section’ and judges for racketeering given the legislature declared its will, in plain, direct, and unambiguous terms. There is no uncertainty, the intent and phraseology ‘active and consistent’ are clear and unmistakable. Nothing could appear more certainly from the law than the General Assembly prohibits discretionary orders of child isolation. The ‘family section’ and colluding judges hold no power to override the statute, except by criminal enterprise.
Here is evidence of the ‘family section’ collusion to defeat the constitutional protections in their lobbying efforts to keep the racket protected:
Immunity. The Family Law Section opposes legislation that would remove tort immunity from all counsel and from AMCs and GALs (Carrubba v. Moskowitz, 274 Conn. 533 [2005]) involved in civil and family matters.
Supervised Visitation. The Family Law section opposes legislation which would limit the circumstances under which the court might order supervised visits between a parent and child, or limit the period during which supervised visits may be ordered, or limit the qualifications of providers, or otherwise limit the court’s absolute power.
Immunity for Psychologists & Psychiatrists. The Family Law section supports legislation which would confer quasi-judicial immunity in tort litigation on licensed mental health professionals appointed by the court to perform forensic evaluations of the parties and/or their child(ren) in custody cases.
Family Court evaluations. The Family Law section opposes legislation that would (1) allow each parent to select his/her own evaluator in a child custody case, (2) delay necessary medical care for a child, (3) remove the child’s guardian ad litem from the list of persons who may receive a copy of an evaluation report, and (4) permits copies of such a report to be provided directly to the parents without a requirement that the report be kept confidential by the parents.
Custody. The Family Law section opposes any attempt to reduce or eliminate judicial discretion to enter orders regarding custody or parental access (visitation) or eliminate the “best interests of the child” standard.
The evidence of criminal conduct lies in lawyer invoices, court orders, and the defeat of statute for the harm of children, serving to enrich family court actors. Let the Grand Jury hand down indictments.
Editor’s Note: Attorney General Tong is part of the racket for allowing the judges to defeat statutes for personal gain. Tong is just a puppet on strings, pulled by child traffickers. Second Amendment child protection clause triggered. Jew control over children is un-American.
