Sunday, January 13, 2019

TROUBLE IN PARADISE! or Anywhere Near What Once "Was" Paradise ??

 Could it possibly be, just that easy,  after the huge fires in Sonoma several years ago, where houses were simply decimated much like in the local fire,  and now both Northern CA (Paradise, et al) and Malibu, Southern CA, just  "happened" to catch on fire, near the same time?  And that those 3 areas all involve CA land that allegedly will be needed or used for--- some high speed train system that isn't built? Maybe none of that is true, eh?

                                                  THIS IS ACTUAL PHOTO I TOOK
                                              5 MINUTES BEFORE I KNEW IT
                                                           IT WAS AN ACTUAL FIRE
                          Note: it was very pale yellow/pink; the camera makes it look like fire here,
                                             and NO, it did not look red or blazing yellow...all the
                                          rest of the surrounding sky was a nice sky blue as usual....
                                                   it was just so odd to see anything like it

But only in Butte County, not only does the death toll likely EXCEED 80 victims, but  a town is practically wiped out all in one fell swoop, and even with a planned "exit" strategy [which was to alleviate mass exodus/thus avoid harm in theory, by having "named zones like high pines or low pines, etc.] --- we are led to believe, by reading the newspapers and online reports--- that it [the fire]-- was  due to  high winds and whatever else that many claim involve PGE??? -- because the winds were  "too"  high and the people supposedly just not savvy enough or able enough to run fast, or to figure out why or how or   IF  they needed to evacuate??? Because, wasn't there already a PLAN for orderly evacuation? and NO evacuation notice was given to the majority?

Well, let me be just one person to tell everyone just how confusing  it was, for me anyway,  to figure out that there even WAS  a fire at all on November 8, 2018???  Y'all can call me an idiot, but I have been through fires in the past.......read on........

I went outside around 0815am, only by chance, and then noticed that 3/4 of the sky was blue--BUT I saw a very puffy cloud formation that had what appeared to be pink/yellow tones as well?

 Now I have been through 3 fires before, so it's not like I have not seen fires or not been involved in an evacuation.  But this didn't look, smell, or appear to be a fire right off to me........and it was actually very pretty--it appeared to be pink and yellow (not red and black) so I even took pictures of the puffy clouds? No joke!! There was no black smoke, no hint of burning, nothing but the clouds--- but only in one area? There was no robo evacuation call, nothing.  The neighborhood was quiet, no one was seen outside........

I then went inside and called a friend who always knows the weather, and asked him if by any chance, if there was a fire, and if there was, why he hadn't called me [he would definitely call me right away...]  He yells into the phone RUN YOU GOT 10 MINUTES TO GET THE HELL OUT!!!

...and the reason he knew there was a fire, was because outside his front door a few miles away, he apparently SAW the huge pillars of smoke coming from one side of the ridge. and he saw RED.
For anyone that hasn't read or seen the U-Tube videos on DEW (directed energy weapons)
here's small example...you be the judge. There are always people that believe the government is hardly concerned for the people, and there is some truth to that in all government.

The Congressional record on DEW:

S.2778 - 114th Congress (2015-2016): Directed Energy Weapon ...

Apr 12, 2016 - Summary of S.2778 - 114th Congress (2015-2016): Directed Energy Weapon Systems Acquisition Act of 2016.
Missing: usa ‎| ‎Must include: ‎usa
Feb 21, 2018 The U.S. military has a long and complicated history in developing directed energy (DE)weapons. Many past efforts have failed for a variety of ...
Missing: record ‎| ‎Must include: ‎record
Apr 12, 2016In GovTrack.us, a database of bills in the U.S. Congress. ... acquisition of directed energy weapons systems by the Department of Defense, and ...
Feb 12, 2018U.S. Army Weapons-Related Directed Energy (DE) Programs ... Potential issues forCongress include the following: ...... 33 The Defense Acquisition University defines a Program of Recordas a program that is funded ...
Nov 8, 2011“The substantial backlog at the National Archives and Records ... A new U.S. Air Force policy directive on “Directed Energy Weapons” specifies that ... A new report from the CongressionalResearch Service considers the use ...

Searches related to fire captain Lord on DEW weapons and forest fires

(Below is from a site online, I did not write this, but it's interesting)

.....that's right. DEW fires can create their own weather. that's because the heat emitted from their weapon is off the chain hot. no trees were burned, grass was not burned, but in the middle of an open parking lot, there's one car, flipped upside down, gas tank intact, and this thing was so melted, the cylinder heads and engine block were reduced to a puddle running out from under the vehicle.
Scorch marks on the pavement with no vehicle, fuel, or anything around... fire started on a hillside out of nowhere, an ember would have to fly over the hill and then back to the other way to start this fire... check out the video called The Hill fire and cue it up to 4:25. take a look. there's too many weird things to overlook..
Do you know how hard it is to burn a pine tree from the inside out, still retaining the green pine needles? I'm not saying everything is a scam, I'm not saying it's genocide, false info, or anything else. But there are a lot of abnormal things going on with these fires. they're way too hot, they look like an accelerant was used in many cases, and there's too many things that are not burned around them, there just wasn't enough fuel around to create the kind of heat that was displayed. Keep an open mind people and just look at the footage for yourself.
Image result for photo KFC in paradise after the fire Image result for KFC burned to ground paradise photo

Monday, January 7, 2019

Parents, Marijuana Use and Custody in California

Could you lose custody of your children due to smoking marijuana?

Most county employed mediators have standard provisions that parents should adhere from smoking in presence of children, or sometimes even when the kids are under the control of that specific parent. Further, even if smoking is allowed in certain areas, many mediators don't want kids near second hand smoke, period. EVEN if it's inside the house in another room...EVEN if it's anywhere near where the kids might be, play, or access? Like outside?  **Note: in one mediation case, a mediator told a client that because MJ smoking is legal, to drop the issue...quite frankly, the actual smoking or use of the drug (even where legal) is not necessarily proper inside, where kids are, or in cars and other certain places? or where kids have any type of respiratory issue/other ailments? In any event, despite the mediator, it is NOT a good idea for MJ to be used around kids, period. Don't care if it's legal.

The "smoking" will generally cover most forms of tobacco and possibly edibles.... (cigar, cigarette, vape, medical MJ, etc...)  And many times, smoking by third parties in the home may not be a good idea due to secondhand smoke. VAPING is almost worst because it is becoming well known, that the nicotine involved, is fused with scents (i.e. cherry,etc) that the teens are running to buy/try?   https://vaping360.com/how-old-to-vape/

In Butte County, a jury has previously returned a guilty verdict over an issue of whether medical marijuana is a defense (to child endangerment charges)--- the long contested case of  Daisy Bram, where allegedly, the lesser count of misdemeanor child endangerment was found (as opposed to child endangerment likely to cause great bodily harm)... Judge Glusman ruled that no valid evidence was presented as to the certified use of medicinal marijuana and thus it was not available as a defense. Ms. Bram was not represented by counsel, which obviously hindered her defense.


Child Endangerment in California...

Under Penal Code section 273a  there is a possibility of criminal prosecution whenever a child is under your care or custody and you:
  • Willfully permit the child to suffer;
  • Inflict unjustifiable physical or mental pain upon any child; or
  • Willfully endanger the health of a child.
If the prosecuting agency in your county believes that you are “endangering the health of your child” by smoking marijuana or growing it in a home where your children reside, you may face criminal charges....

These charges may be filed as a misdemeanor or as a felony. Of course, if the court order stated that any type of smoking or use of same is not allowed while child is under your care, a violation might be a contempt charge potentially, if the other spouse or another was to bring that claim forward?
If convicted of felony child endangerment, you could be sentenced to up to six years in prison and ordered to pay a maximum $10,000 fine. A misdemeanor conviction is punishable by up to one year in county jail, up to a $1,000 fine, or both.

Why is Alcohol Allowed But Not MJ?

Generally, no courts like the idea of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, edibles, cigarettes, cigars, etc. when it comes to kids. Although there are tons of rules regarding drunk driving, there are not tons of rules for intoxication at home due to getting high on drugs, including legal marijuana and the like. While the hearsay out there is that MJ will be used, consumed and grown by large business, including beer companies, and that the feds will be changing those laws, it is a possibility, but we wouldn't bet your life on it happening super soon. The banks and other super duty corporations always want to benefit themselves first. BUT if they manage to do it, we can be assured that they will have already thought of safer ways to tone down common marijuana so that it would be as common as alcohol, and treated closer to the way alcohol is regulated.  OTOH, the presence of nicotine in the vaping formulas which are targeting teens (and apparently succeeding)-- is something that relies on curiosity and being popular, because "everyone" is trying it. However one is supposed to be 21 to be "vaping"....well, we are sure that plenty of people are ignoring that there law?? LOL
Parents that are smoking or vaping, your kids are watching you.

Note:  //The courts generally do not favor the smoking of MJ, even if it is medically prescribed. People with chronic anxiety often resort to marijuana use, or prescription meds. The meds only do so much, the overly anxious client will still be overly anxious, but somewhat better than with no meds at all.//

https://buttecountyfamilylawlawyer.blogspot.com/  Another site by attorney C. Chan

Wednesday, January 2, 2019

MJ Law Claiming to Protect Minors from Online Ads?

On Jan. 1, 2019, a new California law introduced by Assemblyman Ed Chau

will go into effect with the aim of closing this loophole for good. AB 3067

 will help protect minors from online advertisements of a product which they

cannot legally consume.

RELATED: Pot deliveries can be made throughout California, regulators say

Basically, AB 3067 adds any cannabis, cannabis product, cannabis business,

or any instrument or paraphernalia that is designed for the smoking or ingestion

 of cannabis to the list of products and services subject to the Privacy Rights for

 California Minors in the Digital World (PRCMDC).

Lisa Buffo, Founder and CEO of Cannabis Marketing Association, says that this

new law mainly clarifies some of the language that was already in effect.

"One significant change is that businesses are not allowed to use depictions or

 images of anyone under 21. Before, businesses were not allowed to use

 depictions or images of minors under 18," Buffo says.

Buffo's organization helps educate cannabis marketers on current and future

 advertising and marketing regulations and connects communications

 professionals within the cannabis industry. Buffo aims to keep people in the

 industry informed and, in doing so, close the education gap between cannabis

 and the consumer.

"There is a large education gap between the industry and the public regarding

cannabis," Buffo says. "Speaking to the media and educating the press about

what your business is doing is one way to reach an audience."

PRCMDC currently prohibits an operator of a website, online service, online or

 mobile app directed to minors from marketing or advertising certain cannabis

and tobacco products.

Operators are also prohibited from knowingly using,

disclosing, or compiling, or allowing a third party to use, disclose, or compile

the personal information of a minor for the purpose of advertising certain products.

AB 3067 expands these current regulations on privacy for minors, making it

harder for advertisers of cannabis and tobacco paraphernalia to reach internet

 and app users under the age of 21.

The law is ultimately designed to protect minors.
Blogger:  To be honest, making it "harder" for advertisers to sell weed to minors online
is basically not going to stop kids from the bud.  It doesn't take rocket science or a
professional advertiser to know this, *however* if an ad company doesn't want to break
a law, then that advertiser just has to be aware of the laws involving minors/weed.
In other words, just because depictions of kids smoking weed aren't visible, this will have
little effect overall on the kids that want to smoke weed (no matter what age)...there are
going to be potheads whether it's popular or not. Nothing has really changed that much
since the 70's except now everyone uses the Internet, and people seldom play records or
even own a clock, kids don't want to drive, own a car, or move out from their parent's home.
Maybe it has gotten worse? LOL  The baby went to CPS, felony child endangerment, etc.
REALITY:  People apparently are pretty stupid, as evidenced by this case. But at least it
was not worse, had she not put it on FACEBOOK, she probably wouldn't be in jail...
(video shared over a million times; police encouraged people to report 'crimes'...)

Saturday, December 1, 2018

Best Attorney? What You Want May or May Not Work for Your Case

The correct word is probably more like "appropriate", since each case has the claimed facts, and each side has some type of emotional deal that goes with it.

Family law attorneys may focus on divorces, but child custody does not require a divorce in the first place?  Whether married or unmarried, the issue of kids is common, and the issues involving kids is also commonly a point of problematic issues.

While many attorneys can handle custody issues, and financial issues, and legal issues, there really is not one type of person,  attorney wise, that will be the best fit for all clients. Having knowledge of procedure in family law is a given, but pretty much the way family law attorneys handle divorces and cases can vary.  Some may like to focus on mediation and settlement, and that's pretty much what they do.

It does not take a litigator to focus on settlement. It does not take a real fighter to focus on mediation.

So for those who wish to settle everything, and they can actually agree to work out something, that's great. Should they have to pay $3k, $5k; or even $60k, $200k, or close, to work it out? Maybe, if there are serious numbers in the portfolio, many issues with properties, and tax issues. Or large businesses and valuations (let's say a dentist wants to sell the practice; or doctor wants to divide the practice,etc.) Would that require an attorney or a tax person? Could be both but seems more like tax to me.....

However, for the not so rich  people who don't get along and couldn't work out a plan if you paid both of them, and for any couple that has long been fighting about various issues, of which money might only be one small issue, it may not be the mediator type attorney that can work anything out.
In many cases, clients will not back down for varying reasons, and some of those reasons are definitely valid? and why not? Maybe they are actually being ripped off? Maybe one party has no parenting skills whatsoever? Maybe one parent is on drugs?

What attorney commonly sees, is that one parent is really off base in his or her attitude toward the kids, or whatever they are fighting about, and the other parent will not give in-- and often times, rightly so...  On the other hand, sometimes one person is dead set on some type of action he or she wants, and will not let that go (say, one wants to keep a house but the other wants it..) Or, commonly seen, is that one parent is the better caretaker of kids but is always working, leaving the not so good parent taking care of the kids--but doing a terrible job?

Then there could be domestic violence issues and not any money issues? OR one or both parents have their own issues inherent to their personalities, and that will fuel more fighting.

For the most part, the non financial workouts are often much more difficult emotionally, and the financial ones can be maddening rather than depressing.  You don't usually need litigation for financial workouts if people can agree upon numbers or certain assets. Sometimes there will be fighting because no one will agree on actual numbers, thus there is no agreement on who gets what.

There could be deceit or huge discrepancies used in the financial holdings, in which case tracing would be used and investigators or CPAs if needed. Litigation might have to be used if there is fraud or something close. It could be that spousal support would be an issue as one side claims he/she doesn't make the amount the other side claims?     

Normally -- fraud doesn't just get mediated away? There is a lot written in the family code concerning finances because historically, some people have chosen to try and swindle the spouse; therefore, litigation is usually required. Large dealership sales, acquisitions and larger transfers can be very big litigation issues, especially if they were done without oversight.

As for the children and custody fights, sometimes both parents have some fairly common beliefs and not every parent is wrong. Sometimes a mediator can decide what is in the best interest of the kids, but other times we have seen some decisions that are not exactly what we would call fair...

It might be when some people look for attorneys, they really want a fighter and not a weak advocate. It is true that some attorneys are not able to actually litigate because they really have little skill at trial advocacy. Others may have better skills at settling issues, because they can find some common ground to parcel out to each side.  In choosing an advocate, each client probably needs to feel confident to some degree, that whatever type of action they are trying to get--that the attorney can actually do that action for them.  

The best way for an attorney to find out whether they are suited to a case is to ask a lot of specific questions.  It takes more time, but in the long run it will help the client, and the attorney can better perform the duties required. Hopefully that would lead to success for the client's case!

Monday, November 19, 2018

How Can I Fix My Custody Order?

This is one of the most commonly seen issues around. And apparently this is the case throughout the entire state of California.  Further, it is extremely common now to find parents and family with various afflictions, including mental, emotional, behavioral, etc.  In turn, this obviously will affect the kids, extended family, and more.

One of the worst things that attorney sees, and is always surprised each time--is finding that less than half of clients seen-- actually get on some type of program for their mental or emotional issues.

If that was done, it would lessen the effects that travel down to the kids. But when the parent's try and take care of their own issues, rather than pretending they do not exist,  it becomes much easier to work with the kids, whether they have any issues or not.

Another very very common scenario is for each parent to blame the other parent. Of course some of that is likely true, but not every set of parents can actually do "co-parenting" ....and attorney believes that parents with issues mentioned above, may not work well in "co-parenting" set ups.

Attorney believes that "co-parenting" assumes that there are not major issues with the parents. But when there are some huge issues with a parent (or both)-- it is highly unlikely that co-parenting will work smoothly simply because the very nature of cooperation is assumed, and quite obviously parents themselves who have issues are not likely to stick with cooperation.

 If such parents can prove they can do it, that is one thing, but inevitably usually what happens is, one parent starts taking advantage of the other parent. In other words, there are many parents that believe they should stay together for the sake of the kids.

 What they don't realize is the harm they do to the kids when they do not parent the kids successfully?

"Fixing" your custody order might require a re-work of whatever you have in order to FIX it!