Most litigants are used to the lunacy of the Riverside Superior Court judiciary. Denigration; however, takes on a whole new meaning when it is designed to destroy your self esteem, your sense of self worth, your ability to live your life without the obsessive control fetish of a denigrating judge who advises parents to take their child firmly by the hand and announces in proceedings that he himself pulled his son’s tooth and that there was blood on the floor. That control of course takes on a whole different level when each and every instance is used to control a parent in the most horrific manner imaginable.
Denigration itself is defined as to speak, 1. damagingly of; criticize in a derogatory manner; sully; defame: to denigrates someone’s character. 2. to treat or represent as lacking in value or importance; belittle; disparage: to denigrate someone’s contributions to a project.
Proceedings are designed to denigrate your status as parent, and to fixate on absolutely meaningless points merely to cover up the actual behavior of the other parent. The respective minute orders reflects the biased and denigrating attitude of the respective judge, rather than the actual existing orders, and are designed to remind the parent at the receiving end of this behavior that this parent is under the control and whim of the biased judge. This judge also threatens repeatedly that he will take custody away without any reason.
The purpose of these proceedings is of course not the best interest of the child, it is the judge who has to take the center of attention with an utter conceited attitude, and with an absolute callous disregard for any children and the actual history of what has occurred and is currently occurring with the children.
This behavior is bolstered by the CURRENT and PAST RIVERSIDE Superior Court Presiding Judges (Judge Harold Hopp and Judge Mark Cope). Judge Hopp called a parent a LIAR and that a proceeding will NEVER be granted. That attitude permeates throughout the entire court. Bias and Prejudice is the norm as is the denigrating attitude of the relevant judiciary who does not even view children as children but as THINGS and calls them THEY during proceedings. Mothers are automatically referred to as SHE during proceedings and referred to as MRS although they may not be married. The court views mothers as possessions. Complaints against the illegal actions of this judge that violate every law are met with approval by the Riverside Superior Court Presiding Judge who does not view anything wrong with the violation of all relevant statutes.
Litigants of course have to cater to the STOP YOUR JIGGLING attitude of the relevant family law judge and leave their drama away from that respective judge although that IS HIS JOB. FAMILY LAW by its very nature involves drama. Abuse is minimized unless certain attorneys are favored (and two incidences 6 months apart are sufficient to grant restraining orders). The same incidences of abuse are not viewed as abuse in other cases, but mere frustration on behalf of the other parent, including a threat to beat someone to death which is viewed as criminal threat under the California penal code.
Indeed California appeal court cases have been specifically reversed on the perceived threat and fear that someone may experience; but not by a judicial officer who merely views it as an expression of frustration. It’s viewed as a joke and a humorous remark. The same occurs where the child complains to his mother about being harmed by his father and the child says he was HURT twice and the judge minimizes every instance of abuse against the child. Things of course cannot be hurt.
The self grandiose behavior of that particular judge is evident in his manipulative behavior of every parent and the belief that he has the right to belittle, denigrate and view parents as lower beings. Coercive control is the norm in every proceeding as is slapping down attorneys who merely wish to adhere to the relevant law.
Remarks are made not to view things so seriously although of course the respective judiciary does not have to live with the consequences of his actions. Every proceeding is used to minimize the actions of the other parent rather than actually addressing the best interest of the child.
Litigants are expected to be grateful and obsequious and to be thankful to have a crumb in the form of actual time with their biological child thrown at them. Things of course are not expected to have any value to any parent.