Tag: win at trial

Golden Rules when representing yourself. Part 8B

Part 8B on…

THE GOLDEN RULES OF LITIGATION

Remember, success in litigation depends on three things: the facts, the law and the presentation; that is:

  1. how strong and reliable your evidence is to establish the facts;
  2. whether the law can be used in your favour;
  3. how clearly and coherently you present your case.

So with that in mind, here’s number 8B…

THE DOs

8. GET RID OF YOUR EMOTION

B. Dealing with it.

When you’re getting the claim, lawyer letters, applications, and affidavits…

The first rule is don’t panic.

The next rule is the same as the first. Calm down.

If you’ve started taking care of yourself as outlined in the previous post, then this will be easier to do.

In all things, there’s cause and effect.
Drop a pebble in a pond — CAUSE and you get ripples — EFFECT. Simple.

This has everything to do with you, because deep down, automatically or not, you choose to be cause or effect. When you feel: anger, under attack, guilt, grief, or apathy, you’re being affected by your ex’s cause. She is causing these in you, and again automatically or not, you are agreeing with it.

You don’t have to.

You really don’t.

Everything she writes, everything she says is done to manipulate you into reacting in ways that work for her in court and for her status among your family and friends. She is always the victim and you are always the evil one.

Here’s the lawyers point of view about all of this:

“There’s no point taking this claim personally. Really, it is just business. Whether it’s family law, an insurance claim, neighbourhood dispute or some other civil matter, it is just the business of people adjusting their legal entitlements against one another.”

“Being angry or upset about it isn’t productive. It will damage your ability to fight the claim systematically.”

So what to do?

First GO BACK AND DO THE STEPS IN “GETTING YOURSELF IN ORDER”. This really is that important. You will get your emotions under control by doing these steps.

Second if you’re feeling bad about things you’ve done, find a priest or a friendly neighbourhood bartender and ‘fess up. Priest is better legally; priest – penitent confidentiality. Hell write it all out in an email and send it to me and I’ll forgive you, your sins. Just get it off your chest in a way that can’t be dragged into court.

This means, by the way, DO NOT TALK TO PSYCHOLOGISTS, PSYCHIATRISTS OR YOUR GP ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS. They can only help you if they give you a “diagnosis” as in mental illness diagnosis which will be recorded, which can and WILL be subpoenaed by your ex to prove you’re bat-shit crazy and dangerous and she needs sole parental responsibility, etc.

Join Dads in Distress or other group where they get together. Call Mensline Australia on 1300 789 978 (24 hours a day). Just make sure it’s all informal and no professional records are being kept.

Then decide that whatever is in the affidavits or whatever shaming language she uses to you or about you, is really just manipulative BS and don’t engage.

Simply disagree.

When you disagree, you become the cause side of things again. eg. Ex: “You’re a lousy husband and father. Your children hate you. You’re no good in bed. etc. etc. etc.” You: “I disagree.”

Indifference to all of it allows you to examine it for the lies, misdirections, half-truths and (legally) objectionable comments and tear them apart line by line, sentence by sentence and find the evidence to do so.

This is what will help you win in court. Positive emotions when discussing your children and their future, NO emotion when dealing with your ex, her lawyers or anyone else connected to her party.

So, this means:

At all times conduct yourself with civility to all and consideration to the non-combatants.

Lawyers like to think this helps maintain an environment of respect between the parties and also respect for the legal system that you’re using to resolve your dispute. It doesn’t, because they don’t. Sticking pins in you when nobody is looking is their favourite pastime.

Treat your opponent and their lawyer professionally and politely. Again indifference is key. High stakes poker face.

Very little is ever gained using hostility, and much can be achieved using tact. So don’t interrupt them while they’re speaking, don’t be provoked if they’re nasty, refer to them pleasantly, and consider their ideas carefully while at the same time pursuing your competing goal.

This professional approach can help your case in several ways.

It short-circuits attempts to get you off-guard and then anger, intimidate, manipulate or bulldoze you into a position you aren’t prepared for. And by not buying into trouble you avoid being sidetracked. It gets rid of unproductive emotion and keeps the hearing on track towards a workable outcome. It saves valuable hearing time.

Behaving well helps keep you focused. Why? Because being professional is being cause and that will have a big effect on your ex, and her lawyer and can sway the judge to listen to your arguments.

Rule two of our Fight Club, the McKenzie Friends Club: Be cause, not effect.

Golden Rules when representing yourself. Part 7

Part 7 on…

THE GOLDEN RULES OF LITIGATION

Remember, success in litigation depends on three things: the facts, the law and the presentation; that is:

1 how strong and reliable your evidence is to establish the facts;
2 whether the law can be used in your favour;
3 how clearly and coherently you present your case.

So with that in mind, here’s number 7…

THE DOs

7. KNOW HOW THE LAW APPLIES TO THE FACTS

This is a 2 part idea. Positive and negative. THIS IS YOUR CASE. This is who you call as a witness and who you don’t. This is what you ask your witnesses and what you cross-examine your ex’s about.

You have your application for parenting orders (either as applicant or respondent), all your documents, videos, affidavits, and witnesses there. How does the law apply to all that. Or more accurately where does your application and all evidence fit to the law to prove your application, to answer every single question / point of law that the Judge must consider?

How does the facts (both good and bad) show the judge that your parenting order answers these points better than your ex’s parenting order does?

A Quick tip.
Write a closing argument first, showing how everything in your case proves, your parenting application answers the sections in Part VII — Children.

List out every witness and what they’re going to say, as if they said it, every video, recording, document, receipt, parenting course certificate, birthday and fathers day card, under each section showing how they prove those key points / questions. List out what you have from your ex or what you think she will try to bring as evidence to prove her application under these sections.

Look it over. You have the facts. You have the law. You have the facts answering each section of the law.

Can Part VII — Children (the law) be used in your favour?

If yes, you have your case and you can win. Not easily. Never easily. But, you can win.

Want to know more? Join the club.

Golden Rules when representing yourself. Part 6

Part 6 on…

THE GOLDEN RULES OF LITIGATION

Remember, success in any litigation including your case in the Family Court depends on three things: the facts, the law and the presentation; that is:

  1. how strong and reliable your evidence is to prove the facts;
  2. whether the law can be used in your favour;
  3. how clearly and coherently you present your case.

So with that in mind, here’s number 6…

THE DOs

6. KNOW THE LAW

The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Part VII — Children must become your bible.

A quick history lesson on the Act:

The law in relation to parental responsibility was changed by the Family Law Reform Act 1995 (Cth) (“FLRA”). This Act replaced part VII of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“FLA”) and changed the terminology that is to be used when dealing with children’s matters from “guardianship”, “custody” and “access” to “specific issues”, “residence” and “contact”. It also introduced the terms “parenting orders” and “parental responsibility”.

The FLA has most recently been amended by the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006 (“FLASPRA”), which commenced operation on 1 July 2006. This amending Act changes the terms “residence” and “contact” to become “living with”, “spending time” and “communicating with” and attempts to send out strong messages, particularly in relation to shared parenting after separation, except of course the judges aren’t listening.

mckenzie friends judge don't care not listening

So you must know the sections in Part VII — Children:

Section 60CC How a court determines what is in a child’s best interests.
This is the blueprint for your application. It must answer every one of these points, positive for you and failures of your ex.

Section 61B Meaning of parental responsibility.
This DOES NOT mean equal time. It means equal decision making for major long term decisions, like no allowing the drugging of your son because he’s a defective girl in school who won’t sit still, ah, I mean he is mentally ill with ADHD [NOT!]. Or schooling, or religion, or other medical situations like operations and such.

Section 65DAA Court to consider child spending equal time or substantial and significant time with each parent in certain circumstances.
This is the section that deals with time spent with your children. These two sections are the questions that have to be answered in the best interests of your child in your application.

Read through the entire Part VII — Children. You’ll get an understanding of what you have to answer, but I warn you, it’s a horror story.

Also the Family Court site has a lot of this is simpler English. Read these first. Then tackle the Act.

And remember, parenting first, then financial. If you don’t have an agreement over shared parenting, drag your heels over the finances / assets negotiations. (Don’t say no outright. No ultimatums. Just slow things down.) Time is the great leveler in any negotiations.

Want to know more? Join the club. 3 Day trial membership for just $2.

Direct Examination. Asking the right questions.

Asking your witnesses the right questions, the right way can win your case. Must see.

This is so cool I had to share it.

I was looking for some videos on direct examination, when I came across this:

It’s a video where an US law professor explains and gives important tips on how to ask questions of your witnesses so that you get the important evidence you need to be heard and understood, across to the judge. How you prepare for the witness. How to make sure the evidence they have for your case is fully presented to the judge. Lots of very useful tips.

Now the professor is talking about a traffic accident case and a jury, but the PRINCIPLES he gives you applies directly to you, your family court case and your witnesses.

Watch it for yourself, and then give it a try!

I did just the bullet point list and got both the judge and the opposing counsel to concede a major point that pushed the case completely in our favour in a recent Guardianship hearing where I was the McKenzie Friend. It was a huge win.

Let me know if you get the same result!

Golden Rules when repesenting yourself. Part 4

Part 4 on…

THE GOLDEN RULES OF LITIGATION

THE DOs

4. KNOW THE FACTS

You know the facts. You know the whole story. You know too much.

So if you’re representing yourself, you have to realise that what’s important to you is not necessarily what’s important or relevant to your case.

This ties in with 6. KNOW THE LAW. You have to know the facts that are relevant to your application and pare down your story to just those facts.

A good way to do this is to write down each fact in a single bullet point line or even a single sentence. If you can’t do that, then you have too many facts tied up in your single idea/explanation. They must be separated out. You don’t need the “story” that goes with each fact yet, you just need what was done, by whom, when;

for example:

ex prevented children from substantial and meaningful relationship with father (you) from date to date. (Child abuse)

I, the father, bathed, clothed, fed the children breakfast of eggs and toast, made and packed school lunches of sandwiches, juice, snack, took them to school daily from date to date. (Primary care)

I, the father, collected the children from school, provided snacks, helped with the homework, cooked dinner, got the children ready for bed, and read them a story. Lights out at 7:30 PM Monday to Friday from date to date. (Primary care)

I, the father, have successfully completed a parenting course with Family Relationships Centres. (Primary care)

I, the father, have sought and received family counselling from Family Relationships Centres. (Primary care)

From here you can make sure your affidavit has these facts and include the evidence as annexures.

This is your case; your reason for applying for the parenting orders you’re seeking from the court. If you just “tell the whole story” you’ll have a lot of irrelevant stuff (as far as the court, your application, your case is concerned) that can be attacked and used against you, used to prove her case or your relevant evidence struck out with the irrelevant stuff.

So skip the story and like the detective from Dragnet always said, “Just the facts Ma’am. Just the facts.”

Want to know more? Join the club!

Join McKenzie Friends Club (http://familycourtsecrets.com.au/)

Golden Rules when repesenting yourself. Part 2

Part 2 on…

THE GOLDEN RULES OF LITIGATION

THE DOs

2. KEEP ACCURATE RECORDS

You’re going to have to “evidence” your life from here on out. Everything you do with or for or about your kids must be recorded/documented. Every interaction you have with your ex both bad and good must be recorded/documented as it happens and date-stamped as soon as possible after the event or interaction. And that means most importantly, KEEP A JOURNAL!

Why?

The prima facie reliability of contemporaneous documents.

Especially in the Family Court, judges consider that documents brought into existence close in time to the events they record will often be more reliable sources than the recollections of witnesses related orally in court months or years later.

That means, your journal entry created the same day or the next day, is more reliable and therefore truer than anything a witness says from memory, especially as is normally the case, months or years later.

In McKenzie Friends Club’s MyCase case management system, there is a journalling function that creates time and date stamped file notes or journal entries that are acceptable as evidence.

Often in trials, a chronological bundle of documents (like your journal entries supplemented with images and possibly video) will provide a sound and relatively uncontroversial structure for the evidence, and the documents will often afford important and significant bases for finding facts where there is controversy.

So if you have documented every interaction with your ex, every time she has stopped the kids from seeing you and every time you followed through with access, it all becomes truer than anything she can say on the stand or in an affidavit to the contrary.

So your journal entry or MyCase file note IS evidence of what occurred and will be believed more than somebody remembering from the stand. MyCase file notes are relevant evidence for the judge’s assessment of the probability of the existence of a fact in issue and as such become your second witness when attached to your affidavit adding weight and credibility to your testimony.

In the Family Court, with its feminist jurisprudence, the average guy starting out has a 75% chance of losing. You have to prove every fact that you say and documents created (brought into existence) close to the time of the event are credible, reliable proof.

Your My Case Journal is the Backbone of Your Case! If done properly and consistently, your My Case journal becomes the heart and soul of your case, especially your parenting case.

During the trial, your My Case journal will be a valuable source of events, dates, and patterns of behaviour. Most importantly, your My Case journal will discredit fabricated testimony and lies you can expect from the other side. Your My Case journal should also contain surprises to keep the other side off balance.

With details at hand, you can deliberate on these entries for accurate summing up.

During the trial, you will be able to present answers during questioning (especially cross examination) which are confident and specific. Your former partner on the other hand, will probably turn to, “I don’t remember” type remarks when questioned about awkward areas, which makes her a less credible witness.

So, keep accurate records. AND keep a journal in a format that will be acceptable in court as evidence.

Pen and paper done incorrectly, and it’s easy for your ex’s lawyer to object to it being accepted. MS Word file suffers from similar “credibility” issues and can be knocked out.

MyCase journal file notes are individually time and date stamped that can’t be tampered with by you, so your ex’s lawyer is stuck trying to object to it. They can’t use the old stand-by of, “you just wrote this all up yesterday, didn’t you?” to discredit you. MyCase is a “sound and relatively uncontroversial structure for the evidence”. So use it and win.

Stay tuned for the next installment…

Want more? Join the Club!

Golden Rules when representing yourself. Part 1

Success in litigation depends on three things:

  • the facts,
  • the law and
  • the presentation;

that is:

  1. how strong and reliable your evidence is to establish the facts;
  2. whether the law can be used in your favour;
  3. how clearly and coherently you present your case.

To make the most of these three ingredients for success there are some important rules, learnt the hard way by Australia’s best and worst litigation lawyers. As you’ll see, to use them you don’t need a law degree. Here they are:

THE GOLDEN RULES

THE DOs
DO YOUR HOMEWORK; BE PREPARED

The first thing to do is contact family relationship centres and get parent “counselling”. Start a parenting course. Get the certificate. It’s also vital for properly preparing you for a Family Report. If you don’t speak the language family professionals use, and you don’t acquire some new, higher skills for this new situation, you can easily end up with a negative evaluation, resulting in limited supervised access instead of what could have been full shared parenting. Yes, the difference can be that great.

As one member said,

“One of the first things I did after separating was to seek relationship counselling. I went to directly to our local family relationship centre; began talking to them first, and initiated the process to create a family/co-parenting plan. Best move I ever made. Now I have shared custody (week on/week off split) of my child.”

Stay tuned for the nex installment…

Want more? Join the Club.

Defend the AVO

Why You Should Always Defend an Apprehended Violence Order

Rochelle Macredie B.A. B.Sc LLB
Solicitor*

The advice in the following article relates primarily to the law in New South Wales. Interstate readers will need to make their own enquiries in order to ascertain whether the legal situation is the same in their jurisdiction.

First of all, we need to define two terms used. The first term is “Applicant” and the second is “Respondent”.

Applicant means the person who applies for an order in this context.

Respondent means the person on whom the order is made.

What Is an Apprehended Violence Order?

An Apprehended Violence Order (“AVO”) is an order made in a Court to protect a person from actual or potential violence.

In the State of New South Wales, they are of two basic types, namely, apprehended domestic violence orders which relate to violence between parties who are in a domestic situation and apprehended personal violence orders, which relate to parties who are not in a domestic situation. The same concept is available in other States within the Commonwealth of Australia.

If your ex-spouse applies for an AVO against you, do turn up at court and do defend that application, otherwise you may find yourself in a position where you lack credibility. Don’t presume that just because you’re innocent that your innocence will be sufficient to protect you.

An excellent reference in legal matters is to be found in the Law Handbook (13th Ed) Redfern Legal Centre Publishing 2014. This book is available for retail sale, free online and is also to be found in most reference libraries.

*Rochelle Macredie is a Solicitor in NSW working with McKenzie Friends. She practices with the Sydney firm Oliveri Attorneys and can be contacted on 0407 896 832 or by email at rochellelawyer (at) gmail.com

Cross Examination

The advice in the following article relates primarily to the Evidence Act (Commonwealth) and is a general explanation of the principles of cross-examination. It is not intended as instruction on how to carry out that process as that is beyond the scope of this article. If you are self-represented in a family law matter, then you will need to do your own research as the topic of cross-examination is one upon which weighty tomes are written. This article, merely gives an outline of the process so that you will have some idea as to what to expect. We suggest that you look at the Family Court Rules as well.

What is cross examination?

Simply put, cross examination is the questioning of a witness for the other side with a view to either getting that witness to say something that is favourable to your case, or to discredit the testimony of that witness.

What is the purpose of cross examination?

The aim of cross examination is to present the evidence in a new light. A word of caution should be sounded here, that being, if you don’t do it properly, then it can strengthen the other side’s case.

Cross examination as to the issue

This refers to the subject matter of cross examination, for example, whether a person did something, said something and so on.

Cross examination as to credit

This refers to the question as to whether the witness is believable or not.

The distinction between cross examination as to the issue and cross examination as to credit

The distinction between the two matters is sometimes very difficult to make. Put simply, the fact that a witness cannot be believed in respect to their evidence, does not necessarily automatically mean that the opposite is true.

Failure to cross examine

If you are challenging something a witness said and wish to cast doubt on that thing then if you failed to put it to your witness in cross examination that a contrary position was true, you will not be allowed to raise this position in your final summation. The bottom line is make sure that you suggest the contrary position to the witness who you are cross examining!

The subject matter of cross examination

The idea of cross examination is to listen very closely to what is said by the witness for the other side and to use that evidence to support your own case. It may well be, that a particular witness for the other side’s evidence is favourable to your own case and so there may well be no need to cross-examine. On the other hand, sometimes, these witnesses can be persuaded to bring out further evidence that is useful to your case. The situation, where the other side’s witness says something that is damaging to your case, is a situation where you definitely cross examine. There are two alternatives here. It may well be that the witness is mistaken, or alternatively, it may be that the witness is opposed to you. Telling which is the hard part. Here you have a choice between attacking the witness’ competence or attacking the witness themselves, that is, the witness’ credibility.

Competence
Lack of perception

This relates to the witness’ capacity to observe the situation to which they are giving evidence. It involves the five senses, that is, sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell. There is however, also, the question as to whether the witness was able to accurately perceive the situation in their circumstances, for example, whether it would have been possible, under the weather conditions prevailing at the time, to perceive the matter to which they are giving evidence. There is also the question as to the quality of their recall, that is, for example, whether time has dimmed their memory.

Credibility

Simply put, this means:

Is the person telling the truth or are they telling some distorted version of events that favours the other party?

There is a very tricky rule here. And that is that, answers on collateral matters must be taken as final in cross examination. That is, if there is an issue, raised in cross-examination that is peripheral to the issue that is not the main issue, then you have to take the witnesses’ answer as final, even if you are pretty sure they’re lying.

An example of this would be, in the case of Harris v Tippet (1811) 2 Camp 637, where a witness was asked in cross-examination whether he had attempted to dissuade one of the plaintiff’s witnesses from attending. He denied that allegation. It was held that the plaintiff could not recall the witness to cross examine them as to this point.

Obviously, determining whether something is collateral or not, can be very difficult at times. The case of the Attorney-General v Hitchcock (1847) 154 ER 38, tells us that if the matter is something about which you would be able to give evidence in its own right, then you are entitled to contradict the witness, that is, you are entitled to cross examine.

Now, just to complicate matters, there are four exceptions to the rule regarding cross examination on collateral matters. These are:

  1. Bias the fact that the witness is or may be biased in favour of the party calling them. Please note that this exception only applies to matters that are material to the cause, not merely collateral. In the case where this matter of bias relates to material issues, evidence is allowed to be called to support this assertion of bias.
  2. Fact that the witness may have been convicted of a crime.
  3. If the character of the witness or physical health is such that it makes it unlikely that that witness would tell the truth.
  4. The witness has made a previous inconsistent statement.

There are certain matters with which a cross-examiner should deal.

A. Competence

  1. Lack of perception, capacity or opportunity to recall
  2. Lack of accurate recall
  3. Lack of narrative ability

B. Credibility

  1. Bias, interest, prejudice
  2. Prior convictions
  3. Moral character, disposition or mental condition
  4. Prior inconsistent statement

Rules of Good Cross Examination

Know when to stop
Have a clear idea in mind about exactly what you need to elicit from each witness and when you get there – stop. Don’t be tempted to ask that one question too many!

Use ordinary plain language
You do not want to have to explain questions to witnesses. Remember that most are not experts in law, so just ask your questions simply so that the questions will be readily understood by the witness.

Ask only leading questions
You should guide the witness as to which answers you want. “You then shut the door, didn’t you?” is an example of this as opposed to asking, “And what happened then?”.

Ask only questions to which you know the answer
Do not be tempted to go on what is referred to as a “fishing expedition” or you may get more than you expected and the results may well be quite damaging to your case.

Listen very carefully to the witnesses answers
Listen to what is said in order to ascertain how far towards your final goal the witness’ evidence has taken you.

Don’t argue with the witness
Let the witness trap themselves. Once they have don’t question any further. Refer to the inconsistency with what they have said in cross examination in your summing up.

Do not allow a witness to repeat their evidence
Do not do this as this allows the court to hear the same evidence twice and may well have the unintended consequence of creating a false notion of credibility.

Never allow a witness to explain anything
This is especially true when the witness gives an answer that is useful to your case. If they give this sort of answer just stop your cross examination on that issue there in case they go on to explain things and destroy your advantage.

Avoid that one question too many
Once you’ve got what you want from a witness stop cross examination. If you keep going, you may elicit something favourable to your client’s case.

Save the ultimate point for your submission
If you have prepared properly, you’ll know what you want to elicit in cross examination before you start. Once you’ve got your results don’t embark on further cross examination. If you can find it (at your local or university law library) I recommend Professor Irving Younger’s The Ten Commandments of Cross Examination Video.

Rochelle Macredie is a Solicitor in NSW working with McKenzie Friends. She practices with the Sydney firm Oliveri Attorneys and can be contacted on 02 9550 0853, 0407 896 832 or by email at rochellelawyer@gmail.com

The Self Litigant

Where a party to proceedings acts or appears for themselves, unrepresented by a legal practitioner, they can be called a Self Litigant.

McKenzie Friends Club provides a service for those who don’t satisfy requirements of legal aid, can’t afford a legal practitioner, or who choose to self represent.

Here is a list of some of the issues that are addressed by our Self Litigant Service:

  • How the different court systems work
  • What forms to fill in
  • How to act in court
  • How to cross examine
  • How to object
  • What to say in court
  • Data recording
  • Public information
  • How to serve documents
  • Diagrams of court process
  • Definitions and explanations of key words

Our goal is for a Self Litigant to be confident that their performance in court does justice to their cause and is deserving of a fair hearing.

Sound good? Join the Club!