In recent weeks, A Voice for Men has published a number of articles by Suzanne McCarley, Dr. Tara J. Palmatier Psy.D and Mr. Paul Elam regarding the debacle of the Francis “Coyote” Shivers case who was recently convicted of violating a restraining order obtained or procured on behalf of his ex-wife, Ms. Pauley Perrette, an actress on the CBS television show, “NCIS.”
In each of the articles, these authors painstakingly went through a plethora of information that included a number of court documents as well as interviews of persons intimately familiar with the facts of this case and its participants. I too reviewed many of these documents as well as personally attending one of the court hearings to see firsthand what was going on in the courtroom.
It is explicitly clear that we have a scenario involving a very disturbed woman with intimate knowledge of the intricacies of the restraining order process, and who has manipulated and exploited that process in order to exact a catastrophic and unrelenting level of revenge on her ex-husband. It is also quite disturbing that our criminal justice system has either facilitated or allowed this to happen, or has also been manipulated in similar fashion.
The articles published at AVFM have generated a number comments, emails and phone calls that essentially have gone “viral.” There appears to be other entities that have either facilitated or contributed information in some form that makes one wonder what type and level of assistance Ms. Perrette has received in her quest for revenge. Some have suggested that certain segments of the criminal justice system have been willing participants in this debacle, and some of the facts uncovered thus far seem to support that.
There have been some serious questions as to the actions of the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office, specifically the actions of Deputy City Attorney Elizabeth Biderman Gertz, State Bar # 93523. Information is still being developed, however it appears that Ms. Gertz’s conduct and attitude, some describe as an “angry misandrist” is complicit, with her relentless pursuit of Mr. Shivers, and, for lack of a better word, her “chummy relationship” with the Perrette camp.
What is also clear is that there is a developing trail of court documents, police reports, and electronic forensic evidence that is not subject to manipulation or alteration. As this develops that unbiased, untainted, and recoverable electronic evidence will continue to unveil the facts.
A number of comments mention the unusual connection between the LAPD Threat Management Unit, and a prominent “Hollywood” entertainment law firm. A number of comments mentioned the words, “collusion” and “corruption.” Whether or not this is the case has yet to be determined, but it would truly be disturbing if law enforcement officers have turned into the enforcement arm of a Hollywood law firm to satisfy the desires of a disturbed celebrity with a boatload of cash.
We have seen similar scenarios in other forms of government such as what was exposed by the advocacy group, CREW, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, detailing the trail of former high ranking Homeland Security officials who mysteriously slid right into high paying jobs with defense contractors and defense lobbying firms after their government service retirements. These types of scenarios are quite common, evidenced by the daily news.
The information developed thus far clearly indicates that the Pauley Perrette case is an exceptional, but not uncommon example of the manipulation of the restraining order process, one in which a number of violations of First Amendment, federal and state criminal law and federal civil rights violations have been committed.
I am not speaking of the ones Mr. Shivers has been accused and convicted of.
By all accounts, Mr. Shivers was found guilty of violating a temporary, not permanent, restraining order, by employing a cell phone camera, a condition that may have been placed after the alleged violation. The question that readers must ask is why, would Mr. Shivers be denied the opportunity or the full legal right to employ any type of recording device, either audio or video in a public place?
It seems to me that the only reason for such a condition contained in Mr. Shiver’s temporary restraining order was to prevent him from documenting years of unfounded allegations of harassment and stalking. What attorney, law enforcement professional, or judge facilitated this, allowed this to happen, or entered or signed any order that included this condition?
Why would entities of the criminal justice system prohibit anyone, in a public place, who is not committing a crime, to jail, try, and convict a person, who instinctively employs a cell phone camera to record a possible imminent physical attack, which it did, but also to record the incident to once again prevent another in a miles long trail of false allegations?
Think of the logic of that.
To be clear, Mr. Shivers was convicted of violating a temporary restraining order (turning on his cell phone camera) before he was given due process in a court of law to offer a defense on the legality of the original order on whether it was valid in the first place. Essentially, he was convicted of a crime based on an unproven, unsubstantiated allegation, before he had an opportunity in a court of law to dispute that allegation.
The sheer lunacy of this case makes my jaw drop, and I continue to shake my head in wondrous and glorious amazement at just how desperate and manipulative this whole circus has become, and the time and expense that the City and County of Los Angeles has invested in it.
With a large portion of Los Angeles resembling a third world country; tens of thousands of armed gang members running amok, human trafficking so bad that the U.N. is getting involved, a crumbling infrastructure, garbage and graffiti strewn on unrepaired. pot hole ridden streets, we have the criminal justice system relentlessly pursuing Mr. Francis Shivers and his dangerous cell phone camera and his stupid comments on social media.
Wow, let’s call Sheriff Joe and America’s Most Wanted.
AVFM will continue to obtain various documents including public record court documents, but it will be interesting to see, once this article is published, if suddenly a court order appears to seal these records. What the readers must ask is: who and why would anyone, especially if this case has been handled properly, attempt to seal the records of this case?
If that does occur, then that action should speak for itself — some person or persons have something to hide. On a positive note, some of the documents from this case have already been obtained, so any attempt to conceal information at this point would be futile.
What is also interesting is that Mr. Shivers was also convicted of violating his probation for his use of social media in commenting about his ex-wife. The concern of the court was that some third party could be compelled to take some action that might be harmful to Ms. Perrette. What is odd is that there has been no mention, investigation or efforts by judicial system personnel to investigate, curb or prosecute any person for the use of social media by his ex-wife as a forum for derogatory and threatening comments towards her ex-husband, some which have resulted in death threats.
Does anyone see a problem with this?
There have also been a number of comments, many of which are readily available on the Internet, that the jury that convicted Mr. Shivers was “Star Struck” by the celebrity status of Ms. Perrette. Some disagree as I do. I believe that the criminal justice system itself has been “Star Struck” by the celebrity status of Ms. Perrette.
This case is so egregious and blatant that “A Voice for Men, along with the National Coalition for Men are sending a letter to the Los Angeles County Criminal Grand Jury asking that a panel be convened for a formal investigation. The letter will be posted to this website and available for download within 24 hours.
Even considering the hundreds of years of experience of the AVFM contributors, professionals, and staff it remains truly remarkable that such a blatant manipulation and exploitation of the restraining order system could occur.
However, it is also quite clear that these same types of scenarios occur daily in our family, civil and criminal courts. Virtually none however, have garnered the same type of media attention that this one has.
The Pauley Perrette case is just one in a system of family law run amok.
This case is just one of so many others that occur on a daily basis in our family and criminal courts, and it is hoped that it will be accepted by the L.A. County Criminal Grand Jury, to convene a panel and initiate an inquiry which will hopefully lead to a full investigation.
If the Grand Jury does their job it will be in the interest of public safety, not just in the case of Shivers and Perrette, but in the bigger picture of just how out of control the restraining order process has been twisted, convoluted, and turned in to a “cluster-f*ck.”
What is also disturbing is how many men, women and children who are actual domestic violence and stalking victims, have been ignored, or did not have the services and resources available to them because of the pursuit of Francis Shivers and his deadly .44 caliber cell phone camera and his big mouth.
I sometimes wonder whether or not I am writing a comedy script or reporting on yet another in a long list of injustices, governmental incompetence and indifference, and the army of folks in L.A. who will do anything and everything to get their 15 minutes of TV time. Let’s give those folks their 15 minutes, or maybe a little longer, while under oath in front of a Grand Jury investigative panel, and let’s make it simple; you lie, you go to jail, simple huh?
False restraining order terrorism: a plague on American justice
We have all heard the term, “false restraining order.” I have used that term as well. Due to the astronomical levels of exploitation and manipulation of the restraining order system, I believe that the better term would be:
“PERJURED AND FRAUDULENT RESTRAINING ORDER OBTAINED BY CRIMINAL MEANS” resulting in “RESTRAINING ORDER TERRORISM.”
We are long overdue in addressing these scenarios; when the facts constitute, as violations of criminal law, First Amendment and Civil Rights violations rather than merely arguing a he said – she said scenario in our family, civil, and criminal courts. We must demand that false accusers are held accountable, and that other professionals or any other persons who facilitate, encourage, commit any act, or provide any information in any form, that results in the issuance of a fraudulent and perjured temporary or permanent restraining order be held both civilly and criminal responsible. This MUST apply to lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, child protection workers and prosecutors.
If there were not such incontrovertible evidence of systemic abuses, these drastic measures would not be necessary. Sadly, the criminal justice system has fallen to the depths of being “Star Struck.” The system has lost its impartiality and ethical foundation. Justice is supposed to be blind, but we have seen in “Hollywood” that justice sometimes depends on your net worth and celebrity status.
Mr. Shivers is scheduled to be sentenced on April 24th in Los Angeles Superior Court, Airport Branch in the court of Judge Kathryn Solorzano. What should occur is for Judge Solorzano to delay any sentencing and make a formal request on the record for the Los Angeles County Criminal Grand Jury to convene a panel to investigate not only this case, but the entire system and procedure of the restraining order process.
When we have failures in the system, and when individuals who are in decision making positions fail to exercise common sense, good judgment, ethics and integrity, they must be held accountable, just as we would hold accountable a plumber who fails to properly repair a leaky faucet, or a dentist who causes an injury due to incompetence, or an insurance company that fails to cover a paid auto policy. There should be no difference, but the severity here is magnified by the fact that the entire life of a man or woman can be so greatly and negatively affected by the exploitation of this powerful and unaccountable procedure.
I would ask that readers of A Voice for Men who have intimate knowledge of this case or who have been affected in similar ways write to those entities mentioned in the letter to the L.A. County Criminal Grand Jury and voice their concerns. Letters should be cordial and professional.
It is suggested that any individual who has had similar experiences; when faced with a false restraining order, to prepare a written sworn declaration and submit the declaration to the presiding court in which your case is assigned and include the facts of your case.
You can download forms at http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/mc030.pdf, the California Court Forms website, use Form MC-030 and MC-031. You do not need an attorney to do this, and your declaration can also be used and sent to any one of the agencies listed. You have the right to free speech; use it.
We have already reached the threshold of “RESTRAINING ORDER TERRORISM” and those who have been victimized are in fact crime victims and should be afforded the same rights as any other crime victim, as dictated by Proposition 9, the California Victims Bill of Rights Act of 2008, otherwise known as “Marsy’s Law” http://oag.ca.gov/victimservices/marsys_law.
For additional information regarding the agencies listed and their complaint procedures, please refer to their websites;
California State Bar
California Commission on Judicial Performance
LAPD Office of Inspector General
This watchdog group should be contacted in lieu of the Internal Affairs Unit as the reality of internal affairs units is that in a great many instances their primary concern is not with the determination of the truth, but rather the reduction to exposure from civil liability.
In smaller agencies, any law enforcement complaint should be directed to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Civil Rights, as history has dictated that individual agencies simply cannot be trusted with policing their own, and that an impartial and fair investigation is virtually non-existent.
Additionally; provisions of the California Government Code give immunity to public officers for their acts, even if those acts are illegal, and the Peace Officer Procedural Bill of Rights makes it virtually impossible for the discovery of the results of any internal investigation. It is recommended that if you are the victim of a false restraining order and it involves a law enforcement agency with a correlating family law or criminal case, that you make the complaint in the form of a public court declaration and file it with the court as well as the agency if it so applies. This way, your complaint is a matter of public record, and can be used in other cases involving the same agency or officers.
United States Department of Justice, Office for Civil Rights
United States Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training
Information can be obtained on domestic violence law enforcement training in the State of California.
U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Civil Rights, Office of Justice Programs
This office should be contacted when there is discrimination, First Amendment, or a criminal or civil rights violation involving any agency who operates any domestic violence or sexual assault program who has received federal grant assistance under the Violence Against Women Act. As an example; if your rights have been violated by a fraudulent and perjured restraining order and a particular agency is complicit, then you can file a complaint and request an audit of their federal grant status.
California State Auditor, Bureau of State Audits
This agency is to be contacted if there has been fraud or discrimination in any domestic violence or sexual assault program that is the recipient of state or federal grant funds that includes private organizations; example, if a private domestic violence shelter receives state or federal funding, and they exclude an individual based on gender, they are in violation of the provisions of their grant, and an audit can be requested.
California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board
This agency should be contacted when you are the victim of a crime to learn the requirements for victim compensation under the California Victim Compensation Program, (CalVCP). Additionally, your local office of the District Attorney should also be contacted to learn additional information on victim compensation. Each state has a version of these agencies and would have to be checked on a state by state basis.
It is universally agreed and it is the opinion of this author that the current restraining order system in the State of California as well as in all parts of the country are in a total state of chaos: the exploitation and manipulation of the system is the norm rather than the exception. This abuse hurts true victims of domestic violence and denies them the services that are truly needed. The devastation and trauma to our children caused by this is ongoing and unaddressed.
The case of Francis “Coyote” Shivers and Pauley Perrette is just one of thousands that happen in courtrooms across this country every day. This case is such an outlandish and egregious example of how this system is abused that it must be used as an example in order to give some hope to the tens of thousands who have been forever adversely affected. Thousands of children every year are separated from a parent because of malicious, vindictive campaigns and a system that encourages them to happen.
It is the opinion of this author that this egregious injustice is well beyond the point of any sense of civility and logic. Affected individuals should and must file the appropriate complaints as crime victims to insure the protection of their civil and constitutional rights and due process guarantees.
The abuse of the civil restraining order process is a crime. When information provided to authorities is false or when any person offers perjured testimony while under oath, either in person or in writing, it is the responsibility of the criminal justice system to prosecute them. This applies to any person who conspires with any other person when one of these orders is obtained.
The time has come for the thousands of those falsely accused to speak up, file the appropriate complaints and to make those complaints public. The case of Mr. Shivers and Ms. Perrette has received an enormous amount of media attention and is an outrageous example of the abuses of the system. Those in positions of decision making and responsibility must be pressured to perform their duties free of influence from any special interest group.
Those decision makers are bound by an oath to carry out their duties in a fair and unbiased manner, employing the highest standards of ethics and integrity, and to maintain the public trust in those institutions. It is time for the foundational mindset of the myth of man – bad / woman – victim to be broken and that the entire paradigm, training program, policies, procedure and regime changed to reflect the reality of everyday occurrences in our family, civil and criminal courts.
The definitions of what constitutes domestic violence need to be brought back into the realm of logic and common sense.
Here’s a hint folks, turning on a cell phone camera and making dumb comments is not an act of violence. To the mainstream and entertainment media, pull your head out of Pauley Perrette’s ass and try accurate reporting for a change. To the members of the judiciary and the law enforcement community, just try doing your jobs, for the people, all of them, not just the celebrities that have you on a leash.
- CASA and rape hysterics - August 4, 2015
- U.S. Navy Triples Maternity Leave for Women – Leaves Men Out - July 27, 2015
- California assemblyman sponsors three new college related sexual assault bills - June 16, 2015
- It’s about time: Family law attorney sentenced to two years - August 24, 2014
- The current push for colleges to investigate allegations of sexual abuse can hurt valid cases: A law enforcement perspective - August 5, 2014