Bias and more bias

Why is it that women make false allegations (making them sound vindictive and malicious) but men frame people (which sounds like they need intelligence and talent)?

Seemona Sumasar spent months behind bars after ex orchestrated elaborate frame-up to silence her

Sumasar was sprung last week, and yesterday, her conniving ex, Jerry Ramrattan, was charged as the mastermind of a stunning scheme. He was desperate to get her to drop the sex attack charges she filed in September 2009 after the two split up, officials said. So he paid two pals to concoct the armed robbery lies, authorities say.

Sumasar said cops thought she was crazy when she proclaimed her innocence and recounted the months of hell the spurned Ramrattan put her through.

“They acted like I’m just trying to blame somebody else for something I did,” Sumasar told reporters. “They did not want to look at it at all.”

Before the Far Rockaway woman was arrested in May by Long Island cops and held on $1 million bail, she says, Ramrattan, 38, was behind a massive campaign of harassment and intimidation.

She suspects he filed a series of anonymous complaints that prompted health and building inspectors to descended on her Golden Crust bakeshop.

Once she landed in jail, the business went under and her home is now threatened with foreclosure. The most painful part was being away from her 12-year-old daughter, Chiara.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/12/08/2010-12-08_seemona_sumasar_spent_months_behind_bars_after_ex_orchestrated_elaborate_frameup.html#ixzz18ngeV2tU

And bias in the criminal justice system (no surprise there):

Sumasar and her lawyer call it all a miscarriage of justice.

They complain that investigators refused to check out her alibi that she was at a Connecticut casino when one of the armed robberies supposedly happened.

Everybody looked at me as a drama queen, like I’m giving them a Lifetime movie story,” she said.

Sumasar, who spent a decade working on Wall Street before launching her own business, had never been in jail before.

“I did everything I could to keep my mind from going crazy,” she said. “I was praying somebody’s going to listen.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/12/08/2010-12-08_seemona_sumasar_spent_months_behind_bars_after_ex_orchestrated_elaborate_frameup.html#ixzz18nh1jma2

Believe women – Thanks Baltimore Sun!

Thanks in part to reporting done by The Sun newspaper, the Senate Crime & Drugs subcommittee has asked the Office of Violence Against Women to discuss the problem of impunity in rape cases. Now if we can just get them to look at all the other cases – like those in family court, for another.

U.S. Senate committee to hold hearing on rape investigations

The Sun reported in July that Baltimore for years led the nation in the percentage of rape cases in which police concluded that the victim was lying, with more than 3 in 10 cases determined to be “unfounded.” Other cities have seen disturbingly high percentages of uninvestigated or dropped rape cases in years past, and a women’s advocate in Philadelphia pushed for the congressional hearing after the Sun’s investigation reignited concerns.

So the police are our first “judge & jury”…

The Sun analysis showed that four out of 10 calls to 911 over a five-year period had not generated a police report, having been dismissed by officers at the scene. Victims have reported being interrogated by detectives about their motives and truthfulness, while others said patrol officers ignored their allegations.

Believe women

Child psychologist loses custody of her 2 sons

Amy Castillo was a pediatrician with a clean record yet the judge believed her husband (who had vandalized the house, threatened to kill the kids and was institutionalized) and she was denied a restraining order.

He drowned the 3 children in a hotel bathtub in Baltimore.

Now, here’s another case – a child psychologist loses custody of her 2 sons after making allegations of abuse. The judge transfers custody to the husband until the mother ‘changes her mind about the allegations.’ Even her family members are forbidden contact.

I can’t say whether these allegations are true or not, but allegations can be hard to prove and this judge’s decisions are ridiculous. Clearly, the judge doesn’t believe this woman made false allegations malicously, so by punishing her, she’s sending a message that allegations – whether or not they’re made in good faith – will be penalized severely.  Not a good public health policy.

She recalls how, on the evening she lost her children, Tin ordered her and her family to stay put in the courtroom and directed that Pennington’s nanny drive her boys to their father’s parents. As the boys sobbed, Pennington says, the exchange took place in the parking lot of a Charlotte pancake house.

It’s been 18 months since then, and Pennington says she’s seen her sons for only 17 hours, despite completing thousands of dollars in court-ordered therapy. To get more visitation, she’s supposed to change her mind about allegations she made against her ex-husband. Yet she claims requirements in Tin’s order are impossible to meet.

Change her mind? Is that what Judge Tin thinks is the answer to a mother who believes abuse took place?

When Pennington and her ex-husband divorced in 2006, they agreed to share custody. Back then, nothing suggested their break-up would end so badly.

But in 2007, Pennington filed for primary custody. She alleged, among other things, that her ex-husband wasn’t properly giving one son his asthma medicine and wasn’t adequately preparing the two boys for school.

Pennington and her ex-husband tried mediation. It failed. About two weeks later, in early 2008, she reported serious allegations to a pediatrician. A Department of Social Services investigation followed.

To protect the privacy of the boys, the Observer isn’t providing details of the allegations or identifying the children or their father, who shares their last name.

In subsequent months, Pennington reported several more incidents that she said her sons disclosed to her following visits with their father, according to Tin’s order.

But the DSS investigation didn’t substantiate Pennington’s allegations. And police concluded the allegations were unfounded, Tin’s order says.

Instead, it was Pennington who DSS cited for neglect, finding that she had repeatedly discussed the allegations with her sons. During the trial, a DSS social worker testified that one of Pennington’s sons said his mom and her boyfriend talked about the allegations all the time, “even after the judge told them not to talk about it.”

The trial lasted 13 days. When it was over, Tin issued a tough ruling from the bench. She gave custody of the boys to their father and limited Pennington, at first, to supervised visitation with her children – if her therapist and their therapists deemed it appropriate.

How is discussing abuse allegations with children considered neglect?!?
Tin also ordered Pennington to pay $266,657 for her ex-husband’s attorney fees. He was represented by lawyers with James, McElroy & Diehl.
She doesn’t just get fined for a “false allegation,” she has to pay over $250,000 for her exes legal fees, along with her own.
Tin wrote that Pennington may have believed the allegations she was making. But if she ever wanted unsupervised time with her boys, the judge required an unusual condition: Pennington would have to show a “changed perspective,” admitting that her ex-husband didn’t commit the acts she alleged, and that her actions had harmed her boys.
Tin ruled she would use testimony from multiple people familiar with Pennington’s behavior to decide if she changed her perspective. They would include therapists and her family members – as well as her ex-husband.

After the trial, Tin also forbade several of Pennington’s family members from having contact with her boys.

This is sounding more and more cult-like. She gets virtually no contact until she changes her mind about her sons being abused. The judge is basically saying, I don’t care if you believe abuse took place, change your perspective or suffer the consequences.

Pennington says she’s a good mother being punished for believing what her children told her. She says she did not repeatedly question and coach her children about the allegations.

She’s now supposed to pay her husband’s attorney fees, child support and for therapy for herself and her sons, she says. She has also spent about $268,000 on her own legal fees, according to Tin’s order.

Pennington believes she has proof that Tin’s order is flawed. She filed ethics complaints against her sons’ two therapists, and the licensing board recently agreed that Tin’s order had created possible conflicts of interests by requiring the therapists to both treat and evaluate family members.

Pennington’s complaints prompted the therapists to halt visitations – one reason she’s seen so little of her sons.

Read more here:  With stakes so high, she won’t stop

 Here’s more on Judge Tin and judicial bias: Trials that will not adjourn

False allegations against beheaded wife

I can’t get the link to Buffalo News to work, so I’m copying the entire article. Notice when men make false allegations, the story obscures this, but when women make false allegations it is made very clear. This man stabbed and beheaded his wife and now falsely accuses her of being the abuser in the marriage.  While the woman is dead, the story’s slant is still written differently than it would if the genders were reversed. Notice too how he is using a lot of the Men’s Rights/Father’s Rights rhetoric – about how the police laughed at him, about the advocates “blaming the victim,” etc. We do need to take abuse against males seriously, but abusers will often manipulate people into thinking/believing they are the ones that have been wronged, when, in fact, the opposite is true. And, my final point would be – notice how the system failed her. She did everything she was “supposed” to do – get restraining orders, gather evidence, report her fear, leave him…

Facing murder charge, he blames slain wife

By Sandra Tan
News Staff Reporter

Updated: July 18, 2010, 8:54 am / 41 comments
Published: July 18, 2010, 8:50 am

 

Muzzammil “Mo” Hassan, the Orchard Park man charged in the stabbing and decapitation of his wife in February 2009, said last week that he is an honest man prepared to speak the truth.
And the truth, he said, is that he is the real victim.
Contrary to the pile of evidence and witness corroboration that he mentally tormented and physically beat his wife over a period of years, he said, the truth is that he was the one “emotionally tortured” by his outwardly kind and sweet-natured wife, Aasiya Zubair Hassan.
Few believe him, however.
“It, to me, sounds like a desperate attempt by a person who does not have a credible defense,” said Suzanne Tomkins, the clinical professor at the University at Buffalo Law School who runs a domestic violence law clinic.
In brief conversations with The News at the Erie County Holding Center last week, Hassan said that immediately after his wife was killed, he could have fled the country.
“I could have gone to Toronto, taken a direct flight to Pakistan, and I speak the language fluently,” he said.
Instead, he said he chose to turn himself in and adhere to Gandhi’s principle of “satyagraha” — to seek the truth without selfish interests.
The former banker and head of an Islam-oriented cable network faces a murder trial in September. Erie County Judge Thomas P. Franczyk recently ruled that Hassan’s statement from Feb. 12, 2009, that he just killed his wife, is admissible as evidence.
Hassan has spared no effort in promoting his own version of events and taking control of his own case. He has sent The News a dozen handwritten letters — two under the false authorship of his mother — and fired two of his lawyers since his incarceration.
A News reporter met with Hassan and discussed the possibility of conducting an extensive interview with him in the future, in the presence of his lawyer.
Hassan said he would agree to an extended interview on two main conditions: That he determines when and where the story would run and that he would be the only person interviewed for it.
The Buffalo News refused those terms, quoting instead from last week’s meetings and his letters.
Hassan has never publicly denied killing his wife. Instead, he has suggested he will build his court defense on the grounds that as a long-abused spouse, he finally snapped and killed his wife in a desperate bid to end the psychological abuse inflicted upon him.
He stated last week that in cases where battered women kill their abuser, they “overkill” them — shooting the abuser five times instead of once, for example. And they rarely try to run or hide after the homicide, he said, clearly attempting to draw parallels to his own case.
Police have accused Hassan of repeatly stabbing, then beheading his wife after meeting with her alone in their Orchard Park television studio.
Aasiya had filed for divorce a week before her death and told others she feared for her safety. She had filed multiple police complaints, received orders of protection, produced photos of her injuries, and signed an extensive divorce affidavit attesting to her trauma. Her husband was also investigated by Child Protective Services.
Hassan, however, contends he is the one who suffered immense psychological abuse and humiliation during his seven-year marriage to a wife who publicly nurtured a false image as a kinder and more sympathetic woman.
“All abuse happens behind closed doors, thus NO witnesses,” Hassan stated in his most recent letter. “All abuse is psychological, emotional wounds are not visible, thus NO evidence. … What a perfect crime! Only the poorly trained abusers use physical violence and get caught, for physical abuse leaves behind evidence.”
Domestic violence advocates are unimpressed by Hassan’s defense.
And those who work locally with abusers and victims also say it’s not uncommon for a perpetrator to assume the opposite role.
Greg White, program director for Catholic Charities Domestic Violence for Men, said he’s been involved with the program since 1988 and routinely sees instances where men charged with a domestic violence crime claim to be abused.
“We do see men … that even though they are mandated to us through the criminal justice system and have been found to be guilty to some degree, still claim to be victims themselves,” White said. “Whether that’s true or not, that is often a tactic men use in the program to not take responsibility.”
Speaking in a polite and amiable tone, Hassan said he’s currently housed in a medical ward at the Erie County Holding Center and likes the “dormitory-style” setting and the food.
Despite a letter to The News last month complaining at length about his treatment at the Holding Center, he told a reporter last week, “Compared to the emotional torture I lived with in my seven years of marriage, this place is paradise.”

Says police laughed at him

Many of Hassan’s letters include hand-drawn charts chronicling the “spiral of abuse” and other abuse statistics and theories, or articles about battered men.
He stated that he repeatedly tried to get his wife to face the fact that she needed psychological help, without success, and that his claims of abuse were dismissed by local domestic violence victim advocates because he was a man subjected to “sexist ideology.”
“Anytime I sought outside help, I got falsely accused of sexual misconduct or physical abuse — more than 12+ police reports, each in response to my reaching out for help from counselors, my family or her family,” he stated.
He said he sought help from more than two dozen domestic violence professionals in Erie County but was told he was “blaming the victim,” or “in denial.” He said last week that when he told an Orchard Park police officer at his home in 2006 that his wife was abusing him, the officer laughed in his face.
But those familiar with the Hassan case say Hassan’s profile fits all the markers for an abuser, not a victim.
In his defense, Hassan said he has more than 2,000 e-mails between himself and his wife dating back to 2000 showing Aasiya to be an emotionally unstable, abusive and manipulative woman who came from a troubled family. He offered to share some of the e-mails if The News agreed to his terms.
Aasiya stated in her divorce papers that in December 2007, when a child-neglect proceeding was pending against Hassan, he forced her to tell him her e-mail password, then logged into her account and sent out messages pretending to be her.
Hassan denied the charge, saying that if he was capable of forcing his wife to hand over her e-mail account password, why wasn’t he able to require her to get the psychological counseling that experts “agreed” she needed during their years of marriage?

Recurring theme

He also denied allegations that he not only abused Aasiya, his third wife, but also his second wife by arranged marriage, Sadia Hussain Hassan. They divorced after 13 months with the intervention of the Muslim community in Rochester.
He said he took out an order of protection against his second wife and eventually divorced her because she, too, was abusing him, not the other way around.
“I moved out of home with Sadia Hussain due to her extreme abuse,” he wrote. “She continued her abuse with letters to M&T Bank CEO [Hassan’s former employer]. The bank helped me get a protection order against her. And the court granted me divorce on the grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment by Sadia.”
Those who assisted with his second wife’s divorce said that while Hassan attempted to force Sadia to say she abused him in divorce proceedings by holding her immigration status over her, she refused.
stan@buffnews.com

“Nice guys”…rape

Okay, I grappled with the title on this one. The topic overlaps on so many of my posts about women’s credibility in abuse allegations and men’s “nice guy” portrayal in the media. Here were my options:

1) “Nice guys”…rape

2) He’s “not that kind of guy”

3) Liar until proven honest

Read Jaclyn Friedman’s:   How the media should treat sexual assault allegations against Al Gore

The Tribune piece asks the question, “How can you judge the credibility of a sexual assault charge when there are no witnesses and apparently no physical evidence?” It’s a good question, but why not ask, “Why, in cases of sexual violence, is the victim assumed guilty of lying until proven innocent?” We assume that accusers of other crimes are credible enough to report unless there’s clear evidence to the contrary: a repeated history of making false claims, for example. Or evidence that the two people in question weren’t in the same place at the same time. Barring these sorts of clear contravening evidence, media outlets should consider sexual assault accusations credible enough to report.

Why indeed. Other victims of crimes are not presumed to be lying. Research finds it’s bias and NOT that other women have made false allegations and, therefore, have made it harder for honest women to be taken seriously.  

But sexual predators aren’t monsters. They’re men (about 98 percent of them are, anyhow). They can be handsome and seem kind. They can be well-liked. They can do you a favor and think nothing of it. They can kiss their wives in public and mean it. They can be brothers, boyfriends, best buddies, talented film directors, beloved athletes, trusted priests and even (prepare to clutch your pearls) lefty political heroes who seem like genuinely nice guys. What they all have in common is the sociopathic rush they get from controlling another person’s body.

What’s more, our fierce attachment to the idea of the obvious monster has the exact opposite of the intended effect: it puts all of us in great danger. Every time we indulge it, we give cover to the actual sexual predators among us: we discourage victims from reporting because we’ve already told them we won’t believe them, and, when charges do get filed, we’ve already encouraged the police, prosecutors, judges and juries to make like we do and find whatever reasons they can to dismiss, diminish and deny justice. All of which means that these guys—these nice-seeming guys in your community—are free to attack again and again. Which, research shows, they do.

If you’ve ever seen Dateline’s To catch a predator or watched America’s Most Wanted, you’ll understand that most of these men who commit abuse and murder are seemingly “nice guys.” They’re men that look like your neighbors, like your boss, hell, to me, they’re men I might consider dating. They’re not nice though, are they? But they come with no signs on their foreheads, no warning signs, no monster masks….

False allegations land grieving mother in jail

If you follow my blog, you’ll know that I try to counter the propaganda that women make false allegations. First, this is a myth, a lie and a stereotype.  Research (see: Bala & Schumann) finds that men make more false allegations in family court than women and that the majority of claims women make in court are made in good faith. Second, you rarely read about men’s false allegations – even this article ignores the issue. Third, as a result of this lie, women and children are denied justice and can be further harmed or killed.

Here is an article about a mother jailed for killing her infant (blunt force trauma, torn intestines, vaginal damage, etc.). The judge bashes her and throws her into jail. A few years later, the lawyer admits that her then-boyfriend admitted HE DENIED the assault and falsely accused her instead…

Eight years later, new evidence surfaces in R.I.’s toddler’s murder 

Believe Women

In the Believe Women department, we have this excellent post by Elizabeth Black on the Ms. Blog:

Abused women in Maryland aren’t lying

It’s well-written and backed up by evidence both in her post and in her comment section.

If you need another reminder as to why we should believe women, see this news article on domestic violence. The father slashes his daughter’s neck and kills her 3-month-old child. She tried for 19 months to leave her father. The state attorney’s office dropped charges on one occassion, she was denied a restraining order on another, and the father ended up slashing her on the day after another restraining order ended. She did the right things, but the system set up to protect her, failed her.

Here’s the link to the article: Alleged Lehigh killer denied bond

Excerpts:

This wasn’t the first time Rosales allegedly attacked his daughter.

Deputies arrived at another Lehigh home where the family lived in October 2008 to find Rosales Salazar’s face swollen and beaten. They placed Rosales in handcuffs and charged him with battery, although the state attorney’s office would later drop the charge. It could not be determined Friday why the charge was dismissed.

AND

Once, in 2009, Rosales Salazar tried to move away from her father, but he followed her to her new home and choked her, according to court records. Her request for a protective order against him at that time was denied.

 

Here’s another article. It’s about Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS; Parental Alienation; or, Parental Disorder – because they can’t get ANY of them accepted by the scientific community). PAS is based on the misogynist principle that women lie about child sexual abuse…

The term was coined in 1985 by New York psychiatrist Richard Gardner. He described it as a disorder that causes a child to vilify a parent without reason. It often arises, he said, in bitter custody cases in which one parent brainwashes a child against the other parent by making false accusations of sexual abuse. 

The article discusses Rachel’s House, a center that receives FEDERAL FUNDS to reunite children with parents they fear or harbor negative feelings towards:

The couple say that 93 percent of the kids they have dealt with show an improved relationship with a previously reviled parent. But some children who have gone through the program say they were threatened and cut off from the parent they loved.

“You can’t just open a facility with no accreditation, no oversight and say, ‘This is what we do,’ especially when you’re dealing with vulnerable children,” Silberg says.

Hero to fathers

The controversy over Rachel House and parental alienation syndrome is fanned by what many consider the outrageous ideas of the man who inspired both.

A onetime Columbia University professor, Richard Gardner thought society is too harsh on adults who have sex with kids.

What I am against is the excessively moralistic and punitive reaction that many members of our society have toward pedophiles . . . far beyond what I consider the gravity of the crime,” he wrote in 1991.

Though he called pedophilia “a bad thing,” Gardner argued that it’s common in many cultures and that children might be less harmed by sex abuse than by the “trauma” of the legal process.

In the late ’80s and early ’90s, Gardner was widely quoted in counterpoint to what some felt were sensationalized allegations of sex abuse in day care centers. He was also a well-paid witness in custody cases, almost always appearing on behalf of the father.

Gardner contended that sex abuse allegations arising from divorce are usually false, made by a vindictive mother trying to cut off a child from the father. His typical advice: Kids should be forced to see the estranged parent, and judges should punish the “alienating” parent.

Those views made Gardner a hero to the fathers’ rights movement and an anathema to child advocacy groups.

 

 

Believe women

Cries of child abuse bounce back on mums

CHILD protection campaigners say women who accuse their former partners of sexually abusing their children are being unfairly labelled as mentally ill in the Family Court.

Child sex abuse researcher Freda Briggs and child protection advocate Charles Pragnell say recent cases show the emphasis on shared parenting responsibilities is putting children in danger.

Professor Briggs and Mr Pragnell are part of the Safer Family Law campaign and argue that amendments to the Family Law Act in 2006 were geared towards the rights of parents rather than those of children.

Professor Briggs, from the University of South Australia, specialises in research into child sex abuse. Mr Pragnell is from the National Council for Children Post-Separation, which is part of the Safer Family Law campaign. He has been called as an expert witness in child sex abuse cases in Australia, Britain and New Zealand.

They cite a Sydney case of a child who was allegedly put at risk of danger by being forced to live with her father.

An interim decision was made to order the six-year-old to live with her father, at whose house she was photographed in pornographic poses by one of his friends.

A court counsellor alleged the girl’s mother was manipulative and might suffer from a mental illness.

“The courts should focus on the needs and wants of the child, and the rights of a child to be protected from abuse,” Mr Pragnell said.

“Too often we see that a parent’s right to contact is given at all costs.”

Amendments to the Family Law Act in 2006 emphasised “co-operative” parenting and shared responsibilities.

In January, Attorney-General Robert McClelland released three reviews into these amendments.

A review by the Australian Institute of Family Studies accepts that some of the consequences of a focus on shared parenting responsibilities have been “less than favourable”.

Child Abuse Prevention Service manager Karen Craigie said women and men contacted the service regularly after raising concerns of sexual abuse and being labelled mentally ill.

“We get lots of calls about this. It is common. Women involved are often subjected to domestic violence and are very traumatised,” Ms Craigie said.

“I have heard of cases where women are so afraid of losing their children and solicitors will advise them that raising concerns of sexual abuse will make them look like they are being obstructive.”

Angela Lynch, a solicitor for the Women’s Legal Service in Queensland who has advised women in these situations, said the family court system was too “pro-father involvement”.

“In a nice family, that is a great thing. When there are issues of abuse and domestic violence, it is a huge problem,” Ms Lynch said. “If you raise sexual abuse in court, you are seen as an unfriendly parent, which is the worst thing you can be in family court.”

The Federal Magistrates Court and the Family Court of Australia would not comment.

Source: The Sun-Herald

Who let the pigs out? oink, oink

Couldn’t resist. Maryland “legislators” are being called pigs and for good reason. Recently, they failed to lower the level of evidence from “clear and convincing” to “preponderance,” a measure that would have made it easier for citizens to get restraining orders against those that pose a threat.

Amy Castillo testified at the hearing to support HB 700. She sought a restraining order and was denied because she wasn’t found credible. Dr. Castillo, a pediatrician with a clean record, said her husband threatened to kill their 3 children. Mark Castillo, who vandalized their doors & windows, had problems with mental illness, and threatened to kill their 3 children – well, folks, I guess HE was seen as credible – later DROWNED their 3 children one-by-one in a hotel bathroom.

There is a deeply-rooted problem in society, being stoked by Men’s Rights Activists and Fathers Righters, that women are not credible (in their words, women are “vindictive liars”). The consequences are not only that men get away with crimes or that “innocent men” can keep their clean records – the consequences result in the death of women and children on a weekly, if not daily, basis. (See the recent case of Katie Tagle who was called a liar several times in court and whose husband took their 9-month-old son and killed him – there’s plenty of other similar cases).  Women are far from winning equality as long as they are seen as less credible than men.

Female lawmakers complain about judiciary chairman 

House judiciary draws protests

Maryland’s roadblock to helping victims of abuse

Dump Luiz Simmons

Believe women

In the Believe Women department, we have the case of Amy Castillo. Remember her? Her husband drowned their 3 young children in a hotel bathroom – to get revenge on her. Castillo sought a restraining order but the judge didn’t think she was credible. Months later, the father killed their 3 children, one-by-one.

Now, she’s advocating for HB 700, a Maryland bill, that will change the level of evidence from clear & convincing evidence to preponderance of evidence. 

Drowned children’s mother seeks change

Mother fights to change law after husband killed children

Mother of children drowned in bathtub to speak at hearing today

Mother backs easier access to protective orders

 UPDATES –

HB 700 was not passed –

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/06/AR2010030601948.html

Fathers Rights groups are happy about it –

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?tag=luiz-rs-simmons

Dump the Delegates campaign –  

 http://dumpmichaelsmigielsr.blogspot.com
http://dumptoddschuler.blogspot.com
http://dumpsamuelrosenberg.blogspot.com
http://dumpvictorramirez.blogspot.com
http://dumptonymcconkey.blogspot.com
http://dumpgerronlevi.blogspot.com
http://dumpkevinkelly.blogspot.com
http://dumpjbjennings.blogspot.com
http://dumpwilliamfrank.blogspot.com
http://dumpdonalddwyerjr.blogspot.com
http://dumpfrankconawayjr.blogspot.com
http://dumpjillcarter.blogspot.com
http://dumpbenjaminbarnes.blogspot.com
http://dumpcurtisanderson.blogspot.com
http://dumpluizsimmons.blogspot.com