Bring in the Jury to Bring Fairness to Family Court

By Marie White

A court without juries puts the judge in total control, without checks and balances, without a requirement to follow due process. That might be OK for traffic court, but not for matters of life, liberty or even property.

So why is it OK to remove the jury in Family Court, when the lives of children and parents and their property are at stake?

The value of the jury – of 12 peers in the community selected at random – none there for a living – none with a financial interest in the outcome – lies in its ability to grant the weaker party, the poorer parent, a veto on the absolute power of the judge, his favored court actors and the parent who pays them more.

The jury can give the weaker parent a voice against affluence oppression. Through trial by jury, the weaker party can nullify unjust and biased court actors.

The parties can appeal to the common-sense judgment of the people.

A jury ensures judges remain within the limits of the human social contract – that children and parents have equal rights to happiness and access to each other.

A jury will be more likely to uphold natural law and common-sense justice, for they are empowered to do so and cannot profit financially from violating natural law.

The jury can safeguard against infringement of rights and interests by paid court actors, limiting the scope of decisions that take custody away for profit, like children were jellybeans.

A jury might more likely render verdicts that benefit children and protect the parents.

A jury is less likely to heartlessly flip custody or buy into parental alienation syndrome as a reason for terminating parental rights. A jury will be more likely to listen to competing custody evaluators or consider various reports, without concern about how much money the therapist, lawyers or guardians ad litem stand to gain.

A custody evaluator, Candy Byron-Manica, paid by a father, dependent on referrals, is ready to find parental alienation. Her recommendation – flip custody to the father.

Even though the judge might have officiated at the wedding of one of the paid actors and wants to favor his good friend, the jury might not care.

A jury might not be sold on the testimony of the Attorney for the Children, even though her son sits on the State Senate Judiciary Committee, and the judge is up for reappointment next spring.

Judge Anjie Krooks-Grossjean

Or an attorney who threw fundraisers for the judge when he ran for election to his 14-year term.

A jury might not care that the attorney and the judge go back 30 years, go to the same church, worked at the same law firm, or are members of the AFCC.

Let Us Prey

Sure, juries aren’t perfect, and judges can manipulate a jury, but the funny thing about juries is not that funny to lawyers and other con artists in family court – one can never be sure of a verdict.

MK10Art – the jury.

A judge can no longer nod to his favorite, assuring him with a slight wink that the case will go as the lawyers plan – for judges know lawyers have to eat. They are all gourmands.

We have come to realize, like the Founding Fathers, that people are alike all over, and power without remorse is corruption.

Judges are people too.

The jury brings uncertainty into family court proceedings. The fix is not always already in. No lawyer can promise a verdict.

It gives the little guy or gal a shot against the biggies – the judges, the GALs, the therapists, the custody evaluator – who will testify in unison, for instance, whatever the wealthy father wants – as in, for instance, that Mom is crazy and alienating those poor kids.


Jurors are not paid professionals. They don’t make money from scam or conspiracy, and won’t likely see the court players again. They don’t have to answer to anyone. They can’t be punished for their verdict.

They might be mothers themselves or were born from a mother, and might remember how horrible it would have been to be yanked out of their home, as children are in Family Court today – on the mere word of paid actors – and told ‘you can’t speak to your mother [or father]. We’re moving you in with the parent you fear – the one who is abusing you.

You don’t have a home anymore, because parental alienation is worse than losing your primary attachment figure, as if that wasn’t abuse.

Guardian ad Litem, Josie Wolfwitz

Without a jury, children are tools of the court. And it is well-known family court model that if you hand custody to the abuser with money, the protective parent will fight maybe to the death to protect them, and this will make the abuser spend and spend.

We combine to protect the ‘best interest of the children.”

If anyone thinks lawyers are too ethical to play such a vile filthy game – or that judges will stop them – they probably suffer from some unspecified mental disorder, or unnatural stupidity or obscene naïveté.

A jury might not give a damn about therapists who make hundreds of thousands of dollars – smart know-it-all therapists who went to school to study Dr. Richard Gardner’s defense of pedophilia – therapists who say children need to be in their care for years to come.

A jury might not give a damn about their opinions and decide that the children don’t need a therapist. They need their mother or father or both.

No, you can’t count on juries to do the bidding of lawyers or therapists, not even the judge.

Family Court Judge Abel Gerardman

Some will say that convening a jury for every family court case will be too hard, too cumbersome. I see it differently. We convene juries for every petit larceny if it goes to trial. If John Doe sues John Smith for $20,000, he gets a jury.

Kids don’t deserve a jury? Or do you think judges are more trustworthy?

What is a judge? Lincoln said, a judge is a lawyer who knows the governor.

A jury trial means the honest poor will have a shot against the rich, for she can go straight up on the witness stand and talk to the jury in a mother’s voice of the times of their lives, the natal scene, the first day of school, the sacrifice of career, the time they took Jimmy to the hospital at 3 am or stayed up all night when she was scared; the thousand little sacrifices a parent makes that no custody evaluator ever born ever made, and the damn jury might ignore the damn psychologist’s credentials and hand custody to the mother.

The judge can be cool as a green dollar bill when he orders no contact between mother and child, but that same mother might strike a jury hot. The jury will reduce trials and conflicts.

Lawyers know they can’t be sure to deliver results to big-bucks parents. The jury, like the worm, might turn.

Put up both parents one at a time, each to testify, not before a judge but before 12 common folk who don’t have money or not too much, and wouldn’t dream of buying custody or selling children – even if it were their living.

Lots of rich parents who thought they could buy custody, even if it cost a million per child – which is the going rate in some jurisdictions – though you can often get a bargain of three kids for a million and a half, and lawyers who thought kids were theirs to sell – will have to think twice and settle if there is a jury.

There will be less high-conflict cases, not more. For most times, a good spirit and an honest counselor can bring diplomacy, peace to bear, and common sense, which is most often shared custody.

But it doesn’t pay well. A high-conflict custody case can equal billings in the millions. A peaceful settlement will be worth a few thousand.

You can’t make a living on that.

So, lawyers who stoke the flames of spousal war – who employ silver bullets or parental alienation syndrome with a diagnosis of a mental disorder unspecified from custody evaluators to destroy the other parent; lawyers for they know the judge and how to get her to appoint the right attorney for the children, who can recommend the right custody evaluator, and therapists and visitation supervisors – and down goes the mom and dad pays, but maybe less than child support.

The game is over with the great equalizer – the jury. For you never can tell what they might do when they retire and go in alone, without the judge, into the jury room to deliberate, all 12 and come out at a time unknown with a verdict.

Nine hundred years ago, and even before it – the jury was installed to end the power of kings, for no one thereafter could have their life or liberty taken without the unanimous consent of the 12. They call it trial per pais, a trial by the people, not a trial by government.

Family court is a trial by government. It needs to be a trial per pais.

Everyone knows the jury is the palladium of liberty. The jury brought us freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, ended witch trials, fugitive slave laws, prohibition, and much more.

Thomas Jefferson said, I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.

The jury could end the power of the kings of the family court, the lawless judge and his courtiers, who act without mercy for profit, without regard to the children.

About the author

Marie White


Click here to post a comment

  • New comment on your post “Bring in the Jury to Bring Fairness to Family Court”
    Author: Judges create new crime for self-preservation! (IP address:,
    Marie White- you better be careful or you could soon be charged with the crime of “intimidating a judge.” How’s that for an open-ended “discretionary” application of the law- total subjectivity – designed to silence anyone who dares to speak the truth about CT Family Court judges who “intimidate” innocent parents and loot life savings.

    M.W.- I better be careful? You say I’m intimidating a judge?Therefore, I may be charged with a crime of intimidating a judge?
    Is someone pulling my leg?

  • Both parties should file minus names and genders and let judges rule based on the facts and not who is mom or dad or male or female. Use person a and person b. Or use two non gender specific names in all paperwork so the judge is forced to make unbiased decisions not knowing who he is siding with. And then when court rules the final decision, bring in both parties and have a gender reveal party at court.

  • Marie White- you better be careful or you could soon be charged with the crime of “intimidating a judge.” How’s that for an open-ended “discretionary” application of the law- total subjectivity – designed to silence anyone who dares to speak the truth about CT Family Court judges who “intimidate” innocent parents and loot life savings.

    CT has destroyed mothers and fathers that dare to speak out about the realities of family court. If taking children, homes and life savings isn’t enough, CT family court judges interrogate innocent parents and slap restraining orders on them because speaking to the press is “not in the children’s best interest”.

    And now… in the state of Corrupticut, where crime pay$, they are creating a NEW CRIME!

    Corrupticut wants a new crime whereby a judge that feels intimidated can have the alleged perpetrator (aka critic, truth-teller) prosecuted as a felon!

    Refer to #9 below.
    And of course intimidation is very much at the courts discretion.

    It’s not enough that the Judiciary Media Committee has silenced all credible reporting (if any reporting at all) about the atrocities of CT courts.

    The judiciary felons must create a crime so easy to apply and execute that they can wield it at virtually anyone that dares to tell the truth.

    Because the truth itself is intimidating to corrupt judges who engage in child abuse and trafficking.

    Substitute for Raised H.B. No. 6874
    Session Year 2023


    To: (1) Eliminate the requirement that the parties to a dissolution or legal separation action wait ninety days after the return date before proceeding on such action, (2) expand access to juvenile and youthful offender proceedings to the next of kin of victims, (3) specify that information obtained and results of the risk and behavioral health screening shall be used for the purpose of identifying appropriate treatment and interventions for a child, (4) require the Victim Services Unit within the Department of Correction to inform a crime victim, who is registered with said unit, of the Board of Pardons and Paroles intent to consider terminating the period of special parole that was imposed on the person committing the crime, (5) include enhanced penalties for assaults on Judicial Branch personnel providing post-conviction secure detention and programming services to juveniles adjudicated of a delinquent act, (6) remove obsolete statutory references to “family with service needs”, (7) revise statutes relating to the sharing of certain Judicial Branch records, (8) address the award of damages in certain employment related matters, (9) establish the crime of intimidating a judge or family support magistrate, (10) repeal obsolete statutes concerning messengers employed by the Judicial Branch, (11) change the name of the judicial district of Fairfield to the judicial district of Bridgeport, and (12) make technical and conforming statutory changes

  • Family law judges have no experience in family psychology and are by no means psychology majors. They have zero knowledge of what’s best for the child. All family law judges are politically appointed and don’t need any prior experience or training or education in family psychology. One day a requirement to be a family law judge, coordinator, or guardian will be a MD or PhD in psychology at the least.

  • Many pedophiles are drawn into professions like education, clergy, law and medicine because they have access to children. PEDOS run the Family Court systems in America.

  • The author does not understand that state power to strip a mother of custody rests in the sovereign, the people. The state must bring a petition to strip custody, filed by the Attorney General, on claim of protecting the child. Juries are irrelevant if substantive due process is violated by state defiance of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    • Welcome to […] wormhole of “reasoning” 🪱 he thinks he has all the answers yet somehow he never accomplishes one damn thing to help anyone but instead leads them to their ruin.

      • @Frank: Why is his name removed? Did he threaten to feed the tree of liberty with your blood if you didn’t violate my 1st amendment right? Looks like that clown can’t count to 1st.

  • Excellent article. The idea of “privacy” to protect families is “privacy” to conceal the illegal acts, gross violations of due process, and child abuse by court appointed “experts” with long histories linked to the AFCC.

    Privacy is to conceal fraudulent custody evaluations where parents are denied a copy of the report they paid for (or the monied parent paid for to flip custody).

    Juries would deter racketeering in family courts and protect families from being fleeced of life savings.

    The evidence is there. These are serious crimes protected by thieves in black robes.

    There are judges who want these rackets to cease, but they are overpowered by the profit driven industry.

    Juries would restore Justice and deter prolonged litigation driven by greed of attorneys – our children are sacrificed and one parent is annihilated.

  • Family courts don’t use juries because families deserve a measure of privacy during difficult times. Nobody would use family court if a jury of your peers gets to sort your dirty laundry for you.

    Jury trials in criminal and civil proceedings are fairly rare because cases usually settle. There’s no way juries could be found for the volume of cases in family court.

    I could go on and on but this article is pants too pants on fire stupid to waste any more time on.

  • Imagine Catherine lost custody based on a jury decision. You know damn well she would do her best to destroy those jurors lives. No thank you!

    • That’s because you want it to be lopsided
      The system is rigged for money get that through your head it’s got nothing to do with gender stop with this mother father crap

      • Okay. I’ll rephrase:

        Imagine if a non-gender-specific, vindictive sociopath lost custody based on a jury decision. You know damn well they would do their best to destroy those jurors lives. No thank you!

          • Family Law is the most dangerous field of law for anyone to work in. I think it would be wrong to drag in innocent members of the public to serve on a jury and put targets on their backs when the custody doesn’t go the way a parent wants it to go.

  • As a sidenote, I would like to point out that many states now utilize juries with fewer than 12 members in civil cases – and that the federal rules allow courts to utilize juries with as few as 6 members in civil cases. Thus, whatever burdens that might result from having family courts use juries could be considerably mitigated by reducing the number of jurors involved.

    A Broken System: Halls of Justice
    Stephen Krasner
    Stephen Krasner

    2016 – A Broken System Series​
    A Broken System: Halls of Justice
    A Broken System: Motions for Money
    A Broken System: Fighting To Be A Dad
    A Broken System: Misconduct and Whistle-Blowing
    A Broken System: Parental Alienation
    A Broken System: Stewards of Fraud
    A Broken System: Child-Parent Sanctity (CPS)
    A Broken System: Veteran and Service Member Mistreatment
    A Broken System: Court Sanctioned Legal Abuse
    A Broken System: Contempt Of Family Court

    2017 – A Broken System Series
    A Broken System: Timed-Out Custody
    Parental Alienation Is Erasing Family
    A Broken System: Unconstitutionality Of Family Law
    A Broken System: Oaths Betrayed In Family Law
    A Broken System: Gatekeeping And Alienation
    A Broken System: Court Of Parents
    A Broken System: Web Of Enforcement
    A Broken System: Wake Of Family Law
    A Broken System: Fostering Abusive Dysfunction
    A Broken System: Parental Voices Unsilenced​

    ​2018 – A Broken System Series
    A Broken System: A Court’s Eye View
    A Broken System: Obstruction of Parental Rights
    A Broken System: Deportation of Innocence
    A Broken System: Electing Judicial Bias

  • This was extremely insightful. My question is how do we implicate juries into the family courts? Is there a plan of action to make a change?

  • With silver bullet lawyers coach their clients to alienate the children from the other parent…intentional.

  • Great piece.

    Catherine K asked for a trial by jury. But I guess she was just ‘mentally ill, huh?

About the Author

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in hundreds of news outlets, like The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CBS News, Fox News, New York Post, New York Daily News, Oxygen, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, The Sun, The Times of London, CBS Inside Edition, among many others in all five continents.

His work to expose and take down NXIVM is featured in books like “Captive” by Catherine Oxenberg, “Scarred” by Sarah Edmonson, “The Program” by Toni Natalie, and “NXIVM. La Secta Que Sedujo al Poder en México” by Juan Alberto Vasquez.

Parlato has been prominently featured on HBO’s docuseries “The Vow” and was the lead investigator and coordinating producer for Investigation Discovery’s “The Lost Women of NXIVM.” Parlato was also credited in the Starz docuseries "Seduced" for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Additionally, Parlato’s coverage of the group OneTaste, starting in 2018, helped spark an FBI investigation, which led to indictments of two of its leaders in 2023.

Parlato appeared on the Nancy Grace Show, Beyond the Headlines with Gretchen Carlson, Dr. Oz, American Greed, Dateline NBC, and NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, where Parlato conducted the first-ever interview with Keith Raniere after his arrest. This was ironic, as many credit Parlato as one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premiered on May 22, 2022. Most recently, he consulted and appeared on Tubi's "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM," which aired January, 2023.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083


Discover more from Frank Report

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue Reading