With the Code of Conducts in mind and the Judicial Councils role with respect to public complaints involving Judicial Officers also including the statutory objective of improving the quality of judicial service. The improvement of overall quality of the judicial service – brings my complaint to light.
Madam Justice Beames closed the “contempt of court” order and found me to pay court costs of $2500. The case was not complete in my mind it was not over – my rights had not been met – in the three telephone conferences with me the claimant and council for the respondent it was mentioned that the Pension Division of the final order paragraph 10, 11, and 12 were not complete – in other words I did everything I was to do in the Contempt of Court Order but the one thing that the Respondent had to do (ensure the Pension Division was complete) was not addressed before the file closed, as well as a complaint I had to Justice Beames on the professional misconduct of the respondents council due to her lying in the first telephone conference. I was to secure mortgage financing, I approved, and this I did with Joel Olsteen with LendingMax a mortgage broker. I emailed Ms. Lammers office the commitment to finance with details of Joel Olsteens name, address, phone number, fax number and email address, as well Joel Olsteen spoke to Ms. Lammers office on the phone regarding particulars of land transfer, lawyer/notary etc. of the transactions. Ms. Lammers told Justice Beames that she had “no knowledge of a Joel Olsteen”, to make it look like I was not cooperating with the contempt order. I was outraged that Rachel Lammers lied and Justice Beames told me to “keep records, emails and any proof”. The file was closed before Justice Beames could even make her decision upon seeing my evidence that I collected on her order.
Madam Justice did not care about me and did not care that a lawyer must not abuse the process of court by being motivated by malice and brought up solely for the purpose of injuring another party. Lying to hurt me is not acceptable and this is the reason for my complaint. To make me look bad in the eyes of the judge, it was without ethics and Madam Justice Beames appeared to not care.
I feel that Madam Justice Beames did not due her due diligence to protect my public interest - justice was not afforded to me - and not the interest of the lawyers and should always be the primary focus. The legal profession is to take seriously the commitment to maintain high ethical standards and demonstrate personal integrity. Lying to a judge and the judge not holding that individual accountable does not conform to codes of conduct.
As it turns out the Pension Division once I got information back from the pension administrator is more serious than previously thought - the figures do not match the affidavit and there appears to be misrepresentation and or fraud which renders a consent order null and void. Madame Justice Beames heard many times from me my complaints of deceitful and deceptive conduct that was used to manipulate me and to make me agree to a consent order that was ill begotten and now turns out is fraudulent.
By shutting me out like that makes it appear not fair and the duty of judges is to strive to sustain and enhance public confidence in the judiciary system and the prevention of abuse. Now, I am stuck in this system without any justice again over and over. All I have is my voice. The system is a money grab it loves people like me “a cog in the wheel”. If legal issues could be minimized than that could mean jobs, loss of money, follow the money trail right to the divorce lawyer? No regard that these are real people, real children, real lives being damaged and compromised. No it is the duty to society that this does not happen – this is why it is in court to protect both sides, and to have balance and fairness and to keep people out of the system. To quite wasting resources. I call enough.
It is adding “insult to injury” when Madam Justice said to me in court when she dismissed my application “the law isn’t on your side today Ms. McIvor ” in response to my consent order to be set aside due to the Family Law Act of BC. When I stated “it’s the law, I have the law on my side” Madam Justice Beames hit the “nail on the head” because the law has never been on my side right from the beginning because I have been discriminated against due to my lowly position. In all matters, judges, lawyers, police and doctors have demonstrated bias in favor of the respondent with the high powered partner of a law firm divorce lawyer versus a stay at home mom whom homeschools her kids and has no access or control of any money, or a job. It has been “David and Goliath”.
Madam Beams has been well aware of the circumstances in this case where I have voiced equity and impartiality. Judges should carry out their duties with appropriate consideration for all persons without discrimination and impartiality. Judges must be impartial with respect to their decisions and decision making. There was no evidence of caring how unfair it was “I didn’t meet the test” what test? It is a state of mind and attitude and I was “thrown to the wolves”. When that contempt of court order was brought down and opened up then Madam Justice Beames owed a duty to make sure all areas of the order were in place and were followed not just the respondents but for all parties. Where is the balance? Madam Justice Beames decision had tipped the scales so the other side came crashing down – I don’t understand how that is in line with integrity. Madam Justice Beames was well aware of the health and wellbeing problems of my children – I have been in every jurisdiction in the registry all alone without counsel, it was not dealt in a fashion that seemed fair - ever. Nobody even considered me or my children in these proceedings – the telephone conferences were scheduled at 9 am when my children are up and trying to get ready for school – coming into my room when I am on this phone call where I cannot even breath and seriously think I am having a heart attack because of being repeatedly threatened by the respondents council to get court fees and continually trying to get back up into court just to make more money – them witnessing a contempt of court conference, it was like a gun was held to my head – abide by this fraudulent, unfair, misrepresented consent order that I was coerced into agreeing, without having a clue what was going on in trial – or go straight to jail. The whole two years in the judicial system frankly have been inhumane.
In all matters, judges have the duty “not to hear or receive any representations, verbal or written in the absence or without knowledge of the other parties and or their counsel”. If this is the case why then was Ms. Lammer allowed to enter email after the cut-off date – the morning before the last conference call? There was emails back and forth that I knew nothing of. I was really angry when I realized the rules of having all communication in on Nov 24 only held true to me but the same rules did not imply to the respondent and council. It appeared shady and untruthful. There needs to be the assurance that impartiality of the judiciary system extends to all involved and this is contrary.
I am not in agreement of the costs and I should have had an opportunity to have a voice by email, the same opportunity that was given Ms. Lammers. I resent having words put in my mouth – stating that I plead “poverty” against the court costs. I opposed court costs due to undue hardship, mentally, physically and financially, there is no place I plead poverty. This makes it sound frivolous and ridiculous – who could plead poverty when you are a person in my position that has equity in a home, a home that I am forced to keep for the ‘sake of the children’? When there is a misrepresentation that is grounds for rescinding the consent order. “Where one person makes a misrepresentation to another which has the object and result of inducing the other to enter into a contract, would be grounds for rescission as well as relief without alleging fraud”. (Codes of conduct).
Madame Justice Beames in my humble opinion closed this file so fast as to not have to deal with the inequity and complexity and the fact that the balance was off, there is no balance – charging me with court fees just adds “salt to the wound”, does not bring closure to this case – I have been denied Justice – I have the right to have justice and not to shut me out and deny me, it feels very discriminatory. This just causes more costs to society bringing it back before the courts over and over – maybe this is the reason? Would I ever have a fair trial without a lawyer?
Madam Justice Beames has the burden of knowing that she was leaving my family in turmoil and forsaken me. If truly there was impartiality then she would have been interested in seeing the evidence supporting the accusation of a divorce lawyer lying to her in a contempt of court order, or call it misrepresentation of facts or a common mistake, whatever is appropriate, but it should have been addressed. Consent orders can be set down on the basis of fraud and embezzlement. The Final Order paragraph 14 states “either party has liberty to apply for such directions and further Orders as may be necessary to facilitate and enforce the division of the Pension fairly. Why could this have not been done before I had to pay $2500 in court costs? I was forced to not comply with the consent order because it reeked of negligence and was ill begotten and now turns out misrepresented. Therefore, the costs should not be my burden.
The lawyers ink was written with my blood. The Family Law Act says “full and true information”. I feel badly abused by the courts, lawyers and judges and to Appeal you have to have money because you have the threat of court costs over your head like a gun – appeals are 98% unwinnable without a lawyer. I have learned to believe that divorce lawyers are like pirates who lie and use no integrity to escalate the conflict and prolong the battle (1.5 years to trial) to increase billable hours. Divorce is an industry that encourages injustice – for the money of course, if the divorce settlement is fair then nobody will come back to court ever again. Secret to success find repeat customers. If the divorce was fair truly fair then nobody would ever come back before the courts throughout the years. The system is lucrative and monopolized. The legal profession has made an industry of divorce with little regard to the children. Family Law should not be a business. Keeping it fair means not signing unfair contracts and because I stood up and demanded to be treated equally I have been penalized and punished. The courts in my case has stood up for injustice, inequality and discrimination. I resent my family being injured due to a business that keeps lawyers driving new Lexus’s every year and has society believing that the system profits when families implode.
The abuse that I and my children have suffered keeps the judges, the lawyers, the file clerks, the security guards, therapists, counsellors and police all in business, all on my burden. My children left with gaping holes after going through a system that is supposed to help society – in fact is the opposite. Broken homes and fractured relationships account for a debt to society that cannot be repaid so the damage should be minimized from the beginning – the system is to protect and not damage. Thank you for your consideration for family law reform and I do not want to be a repeat customer.
With the highest respect and sincerity
I ask that confidentiality is of the upmost importance, as it appears I am still going to be embroiled in the court system and do not want this complaint or complaints to other professional bodies that have been filed, held and used against me in a court of law or cause addition impartiality or have any kind of negative repercussion to myself or my children.
Canadian Judicial Council
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0W8
Fax: 613 288 1575
Complaint Re: The Honourable Madam Justice Beames
Salmon Arm Law Courts
File No: 14581