I would like to relate my first-hand experiences with Earl Beddow’s  judicial misconduct.

Background

I was divorced in 2001 by my wife, the petitioner, after she asked me to move out in 1999. I had put my wife through law school. I have made my living in the Information Tech field. After 9/11, the y2k boom, the recession, and outsourcing, I had a horrible year financially in 2002.

I prepared a petition to get my child support reduced from the maximum amount allowed by law. I was unemployed for most of the year in 2002. In 2001 I made well over $100,000. In 2002 I made approximately $35,000.

1.    Beddow Lies in a court of law

Beddow made false statements in writing that were extremely damaging to me. “Honorable”  Earl Beddow wrote in his court memo dated October 2, 2002: “respondent has provided no verification of his current income.”

As a former New Yorker, who lived in Manhattan and who lost 14 school mates from Chaminade High on September 11, 2001 and 7 work mates from Salomon Brothers, from the depth of my soul I tell you that I believe that non-elected, politically-appointed judges such as Earl Beddow, who ask others to swear to tell the truth, but who themselves, make false statements in the court, pose a greater threat to our democratic way of life than Osama Bin Laden ever could. At the same time photos of Saddam Hussein's sons Qusay and Uday with baseball bats for delivering beatings were seen, Referee Earl Beddow went into a Minnesota courtroom and pleaded for leniency for his son Beau, after his son beat a Ramsey County citizen with a baseball bat. 

 I prepared court file No. 62-F5-00-001225. I came before Earl Beddow on September 27, 2002 at 11:00am in room 760 at Ramsey County Government Center after filing my petition in early August. Earl Beddow was rude and obnoxious.

I made the god-awful mistake of appearing without a lawyer. It became immediately clear to me that Beddow thinks nothing of people other than those in his professional group, to whom he has to ingratiate himself.  (His demeanor was completely different when Bill Winter of Messerli and Kramer represented me in a later court appearance at which time Earl reversed his idiotic finding. When he walked into court a second time when I was represented, he declared in a very sanctimonious way, “I read the file”.  )

The file I prepared contained these documents evidencing my decrease in income:

Present in the motion I filed on September 27, 2002  were the following documents of verification of my income:

1. "Non-negotiable voucher", dated 6/28/02,  created by the Wells Fargo payroll system showing my year-to-date earnings at $28,000 from Onigum. Earl stated that "He states by affidavit that his gross monthly income averages $4,000". I erroneously assumed that Earl could perform 3rd grade arithmetic and could calculate $28,000 divided by 7 months from January through July equals $4,000 a month. This is far different that stating an average by affidavit.

2. Non-negotiable Voucher dated 5/16/02 created by the Wells Fargo payroll system for pay from Onigum.

3. Non-negotiable Voucher dated 1/15/02 created by the Wells Fargo payroll system for pay from Onigum

4. A copy of revenue check 234123 from Advecta from  which Onigum wages are paid after deducting business expenses.

5. A copy of revenue check 233643 from Advecta from  which Onigum wages are paid after deducting business expenses

6. A copy of revenue check 233196 from Advecta from  which Onigum wages are paid after deducting business expenses.

7. A copy of revenue check 232825 from Advecta from  which Onigum wages are paid after deducting business expenses.

8. A copy of revenue check 232096 from Advecta from  which Onigum wages are paid after deducting business expenses.

9. A copy of revenue check 230321 from Advecta from  which Onigum wages are paid after deducting business expenses.

10. My W2 for 2001 Tax year showing my Wages, tips, and other compensation for 2001 as $109,546.38.

11. Copy of  "determination of Benefit Account" from Minnesota Economic Security with an effective date of 2/17/02, showing an unemployment benefit of $452.00 per week and a maximum benefit of $11,752.00.

12. "Statement of account from Minnesota Department of Economic Security" warrant number 3517562, dated 3-12-02 showing payment in the amount of $904.00 with a remaining balance of $11,300.00.

13. "Statement of account from Minnesota Department of Economic Security" warrant number 3602370, dated 3-21-02 showing payment in the amount of $904.00 with a remaining balance of $10,396.

14. "Statement of account from Minnesota Department of Economic Security" warrant number 3898512, dated 4-06-02 showing payment dated 5-1-02 in the amount of $152.00 with a remaining balance of $9,340.00.

15. Copy of the contract with Advecta showing pay rate of $50.00 @ hour. This was a rate substantially less than the $90 @ hour wage that I was earning at the time of the dissolution decree, and for a length of time that was substantially less than the 11 month contract, which was plainly stated in the divorcee decree.

In spite of that preponderance of evidence that my income changed, Beddow wrote:  “respondent has provided no verification of his current income.” The scanned documents proving this are available.   All of the docs that I refer to are filed.

2)     Earl Issues “sham” stipulations. After Bill Winter represented me, Earl signed  a stipulation dated May 15, 2003 stating that:  “In the event Respondent’s (my) income increases or decreases in the future he shall provide written verification to the Petitioner within ten days of his knowledge of same and Respondent’s child support obligation shall be modified pursuant to the statutory requirements of 518.64 sub 2.”

Earl Beddow issued a stipulation directing me to give notice when my income changed. When I was between contracts, and my income changed, I gave notice as directed. Rather than triggering a decrease in my support obligation as Beddow’s stipulation stated would happen, Beddow wrote a letter back to me, returning my notice with a letter stating that “it is inappropriate for me to respond while matters are before the court”. Therefore, Beddow did not enforce or comply with his own stipulation.

3)     Beddow has conducted political activities in violation of the judicial code of conduct. Earl Beddow has in the past posted political signs on the front lawn of the home on

I was so scared, shocked, jobless, and broke when Beddow did not reduce my child support in September of 2002. I was livid that a judge could “swear me in” and have me promise to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, but he himself could lie in official court documents. I called the office of judicial misconduct. I told them of Earl’s finding. I asked them if that was judicial misconduct. I asked if  judges are allowed to make false statements. I was told “yes”.

In a Sarbannes-Oxley world, where CEOS and CFOs are required to know what is contained in their financial statements under threat of imprisonment, Why is it that we allow judges to simply not read the petitions put before them?

 I said it did not seem that Earl Beddow even read my petition. I asked, “is a judge required to read the petition filed and that the court is being conducted to resolve?” The gentleman at the office of judicial misconduct said “no”. Judges are not required to read the petition. Then I said, as a software professional we follow a methodology to get a high quality, repeatable result. I said I expect that a judge would have to do the same thing. Perhaps like: review facts, find and apply statutes and case law, perform analysis, make conclusion. The gentleman at the office of judicial misconduct said that judges do not have to follow any minimum procedures. I asked (at that time I was shocked. It was shock and awe.) Can judges use a Ouija board in court to make a decision? The answer I got was yes. I asked how about a hair-ball? Like the one used in Huck Finn?  Can a judge consult a hair-ball in court? Would that be judicial misconduct if a judge did that? The answer: No, judges can consult a hair-ball in court and not read the petition. That would not be judicial misconduct. At that point I realized how Kafkesque this family court system was. I said, ok, final question. If a judge masturbates in court, is that judicial misconduct? The Minnesota Office of Judicial Misconduct said, “no  that is not judicial misconduct. Earl Beddow is allowed to masturbate in court, but if he did it on his front lawn, away from the court, that would be judicial misconduct”. AT THAT POINT I REALIZED THAT THE SYSTEM IS SO FAR GONE, IT CAN NEVER BE REFORMED FROM WITHIN BY PEOPLE WORKING WITHIN THE SYSTEM. IT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED BY THE MEDIA etc. I figured I had to find another way to remove this blight. So I located the Judicial Code of Conduct on the internet, and I tried to see if Earl Beddow had violated those.

4)     Has Earl Beddow not maintained the “independence” required by the judicial code of conduct?  Mr Williams has told me that Mr. Beddow has acknowledged Mr. Bill Winter (as attorney representing persons in Beddow’s court,   in court sessions). Mr Beddow has allegedly told those in the court room that he has great admiration for Bill’s mother, who was also a judge, and after whom he has modeled his career. I would think that Mr. Beddow should have excused himself from presiding in such as court session. Do you?

5) In 2006 I appeared before Beddow again. My ex-wife, whom I put through law school claimed  in her petition that she needed more child support since she owned 4 cars, and bought a $250,000 condo as an investment, and the child support laws about to go into effect will take the income of both parents into consideration. I provided my W2, tax returns, paystubs etc. I had received an annual bonus in February of 2006. Beddow , in his decision, then “annualized” the already annualized bonus, making my income artificially inflated. Beddow made mathematical mistakes as well, since he cannot perform 3^rd grade math, and inflated my child support to levels not justified.

Without any shame, referee Beddow makes ex-parte communications and passes ex-parte judgments.  Is this U.S.A. or other country where bribery and corruption is rampant?  I am totally frustrated by this referee.  I don’t know what do about this referee’s corrupt behavior.  Please help.

They are a great resource!

Good luck!

How many others have experienced this ex-parte communication?   (in which things become twisted around in a hearing, Beddow appears to lying based on his facial expressions when speaking or the opposite counsel appears to know something you or your counsel do not).

Consistently, MN Courts have rightly found that “joining the tort claims in a marital dissolution would involve in an overlapping of procedural rights that would complicate dissolution proceedings … and would lead to protracted litigation that would not be in the best interests of the parties or the system.” (G.A.W., III v. D.M.W., 596 N.W.2d 284, 288 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999), (review denied September 28, 1999), citing Demers v. City of Minneapolis , 486 N.W. 2d 828, 830 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). 

Because he is a district referee, he made it look like a district judge had signed it.  What is strange about this particular,  ex-parte order is that there is a signature of an unnamed judge on that order.  When I asked the clerk of Referee Beddow, Jim, to give him the name of that alleged judge, whom I could also ask if he also had met with attorney “Jeff” ex-parte, he refused to answer that question by simply evading the question.  Thus, that unknown signature of that unknown judge is highly suspicious.  

When I reported this to the Board of Judicial Standards, they refused to investigate it.    

What do you think should I do next?  Should I file a motion to remove a judge?  I guess, that is the only alternative of ending this meaningless litigation.

 sent via ACLU online complaint form 9/4/09

My case that bears similarities to The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida lawsuit against the City of Greenacres on behalf of Peter W. Ballance, where the City denied him reasonable accommodation services and treated him differently due to communication issues associated with neurological disability.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.

1)      In Jan 08 my ADA advocate properly submitted a confidential request for reasonable ADA accommodations along with medical information and disability report to Carol Morphew Ramsey County Title II Access Coordinator. Ramsey County is a public entity as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1). 2)      The report identifies I am a qualified individual with a disability as defined in 42 U.S.C. §12131(2) and 28 C.F.R. 35.104 and entitled to the protection of the ADA.

3)      The report contained medical information protected under HIPPA and was marked confidential, nevertheless was distributed throughout several Ramsey County Departments until by circuitous means  it reached the Honorable Earl F. Beddow Family Court Referee, who received this information exparte.  The rules of judicial conduct expressly forbid a judge to consider Exparte communications. Nevertheless referee Earl Beddow received, reviewed and considered this Ex Parte Communication and then forwarded my confidential information along with a hostile memorandum to 12 high-powered Officials, Judges, attorneys and individuals.  Including the chief judge.

4)      The family law case referee Beddow had presided over closed Jan 1 2008 .  Shortly after that I turned to Karen Huffer MS MFT a leading authority on psychic injury resulting from frauds and legal abuses.  She  assessed me on the MMPI invisible hostages subscale identifying  my PSTD injury and identified the cause.  She compiled the ADA report and connected me with ADA advocate Larry Rider who submitted the request to the Access Coordinator.

5)      The report described: Ms Bukstein’s PTSD injury while her case was being litigated in family court as similar to that of a soldier on the battlefront year after year without being allowed a moment to rest. (Axis I Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Axis IV Legal and bureaucratic abuses extending spouse abuse,). Ms Bukstein’s ex husbands unending manipulations to use the court as a weapon, denying her role as a parent without a hearing or due process. That court appointed to process the case turned against her holding her hostage on the sidelines indifferent to the children’s suffering. 

6)      The report states In order for me to heal from PTSD injuries I need misinformation corrected in the record and therefore asked for 6 reasonable ADA accommodations to ensure a fair hearing, including a recording device and ADA advocate present .

Legal Abuse Syndrome(LAS) is a psycho legal trauma (a form of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  It is a psychic injury, not a mental illness.  It is a personal injury that develops in individuals assaulted by ethical violations, legal abuses, betrayals, and fraud. Abuse of power and authority and a profound lack of accountability in our courts have become rampant. This adds greatly to the original distress requiring court assistance in the first place. When litigants are unable to get fair resolution to their issues, when the court dysfunction further adds to the litigant's burden, when no amount of actual case law compels an equitable outcome, litigants suffer often disabling levels of stress. When further attempts to achieve redress fail, litigants display the hallmark signs of Legal Abuse Syndrome(LAS) a subcategory of PTSD. "Invisible Hostages" reveals the hostage condition that results from betrayals of trust and the quiet crimes.  Symptoms of the hostage-stage psychological reactions are put forth with a list of the white-collar crimes, litigation/judicial atrocities and bureaucratic failings that cumulatively assault victims. 

7)      Referee Beddow’s memo effectively created a dead end to my ADA request  in violation of rule and law that stipulates (via a memo not an order)  a special “procedure” without means for appeal that applies only to me and contradicts the procedure ADA already established and MN legislature adopted into law. That unlike other disabled persons in Ramsey County seeking accommodation that  I must get an attorney and bring a motion in a family court  for  ADA accommodations  is  discrimination on the basis of disability it also is a burdensome bureaucratic legal demand which is harassment on the basis of disability. 

8)      Carol Morphew Ramsey County Title II Access Coordinator in accordance with the referee’s memorandum did not process my request.  Referee Beddow’s actions under color of office served to thwart the administration of ADA Title II business of Ramsey County Property Management, and may continue to adversely impact other disabled persons in and around the Ramsey County area who are seeking accommodations and access to the courts.

9)      Without consent or release Referee Beddow forwarded confidential ADA materials protected under HIPPA he’d obtained exparte by illegal means along with his 3/3/08 memo impugning my character and hostile to my ADA rights to other departments and high powered judicial officials. He did not send one to me.  He delayed sending it to my ADA advocate Larry Rider, Karen Huffer MS MST and my former attorney. I did not find out about it until 3/28 when, my former Attorney  informed me she had received an unexpected document from the referee about me and even though she had not been my attorney since Feb and was kind enough give it to me. 

10) Referee Beddow’s memo confirms, in his own words, judicial misconduct prohibited under Rule 2.9(A)(B) “I have received and reviewed the circuitously-transmitted and ex parte request for ADA accommodation on behalf of Kimberly (Raths) Buckstein (copy attached)”. 

 Rule 2.9  Ex Parte Communications (A) judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers, concerning a pending or impending matter. “ (B)If a judge inadvertently receives an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing upon the substance of a matter, the communication should be noted as received and returned to the sender without review by the judge.  If a judge inadvertently reviews an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing upon the substance of a matter, the judge shall make provision to notify the parties promptly of the substance of the communication and provide the parties with an opportunity to respond.

 11)   Referee Beddow’s  memo indicates he already has decided to deny ADA accommodations necessary to heal from my injuries and it’s reasonable to assume even if I did file a motion for ADA accommodations in his court he would not grant them and I would not get a fair hearing. He ignores Karen Huffer MS MFT’s diagnosis and ADA accommodations report and implies my claim to rights protected under the ADA is  bogus referencing  reports and evaluations that contain countless factual errors and omissions to substantiate his position.  Other comments he makes in his memorandum are false such as saying I have an attorney.

12)   We have sent letters protesting this state of affairs to every agency and official that could intervene including the Attorney General and have been stonewalled at every turn. I have no access to the court and  I still suffer the effects of PTSD injury with all means of remedy denied.