Understanding a judge's decision

Thankfully, readers understand that when various media reporters write articles, everything may not be discussed and sometimes statements may be incorrect. After all, no reporter can get the details perfect without spending countless hours investigating a story. Most reporters can not give their articles that amount of time. If the article is of interest to the reader, it remains the reader's duty to investigate before coming to a conclusion.

In the recent MLive article regarding Brian Downs, a candidate for Michigan State House of Representatives in the coming 2014 election, some statements were not exactly correct.

For instance the article states that Judge Daniel Zemaitis was withholding Downs' mail. This is incorrect. Zemaitis previously had ordered all Downs' mail be delivered to his ex-wife's attorney. It was then to be forwarded to Downs. The attorney was withholding prompt delivery of the mail, not the judge. Perhaps the attorney's record keeping needs some adjustment. Similar to some public comments of the article about Downs' record keeping. However, the article is only to crucify Downs - not the attorney. The attorney is not running for political office.

Then, let us look at Judge Zemaitis. He appears to be a kind and likeable person. Certainly he is not without peer pressure. This could possibly affect his thinking regarding being re-elected and his family court decisions. In the 2008 election due to Downs running for judge, it caused three incumbent judges to defend their bid for re-election, thereby costing them financially thousands of dollars. Judge Zemaitis was one of those three judges. Something people seldom see is a candidate against an incumbent judge. People re-elect judges without ever inspecting their court decisions or their respect for the written law. Judges should not spend a lifetime on the bench. There should always be term limits.

M-Live letters with comments stating Downs “has compassion for the law” verify that credit should be given for an attempt of change in the judiciary. It is naive to believe that judges do no wrong or that they do not begin to feel they do no wrong. Until you sit in courtrooms and actually see what takes place, voters should not be placing a vote for any judge.

The article by an attorney in Georgia brings attention to the issues of family court.

It may be interesting for voters to actually follow the money that court cases bring into the county. For instance, what actually happens to the  federal funding from Social Security Title IVE when children are removed from their families? Why are so many children removed and their parents never convicted of any crime? The frivolous allegations used to remove children are many- such as dirty dishes in a sink, too much dirty laundry in the home or just a home that is not clean enough. Are these really reasons to remove children from homes? Former Child Protection Service case worker Carlos Morales discusses this very issue in this video.

Is the federal funding the state receives from Social Security Title IVE merely to support the state using the backs of our children? Over 25 professionals are involved in child removals and those professionals all require a paycheck. This abuse of families and children is what Brian Downs has a heart for. Are there really so many bad parents in our county that we need to add more judges, or should we be changing judges?

The MLive article states that in 2008 Zemaitis did recuse himself from Downs' case, due to the fact that they were opponents in the 2008 election. However, Zemaitis took back the case in 2012. Since there are several other judges in family court, what would be Zemaitis' motive in doing this? Unless perhaps Zemaitis was looking ahead to the 2014 election. Consider also why Zemaitis would take away Downs' law license (bar card), keeping him from earning income from the practice of law. Except that it would also keep Downs from running for judge again in the coming 2014 election. 

The Code of Michigan Judicial Canons states that “Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges.  A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety.”

Judge Zemaitis has a duty to curtail any appearance of bias by removing himself from Brian Downs' case. This is, of course, due to the fact that they had been political opponents and may be again in the future.

Those readers who would like to express their opinion about the issue presented here may consider the following information. Letters to the media are always helpful in assisting other people to learn about a situation. The comment section at the end of this article is also available. However, if you desire to express your opinion to those whose position it is to evaluate these types of circumstances, then the following will be useful.

In Michigan we have what is called The Judicial Tenure Commission (JTC). There is an investigative form on the JTC website which takes but a moment to print and fill out. You may also telephone the JTC  at 313-875-5110 and request the form. The form requires only a few sentences to express your opinion about the situation. There is no need for case numbers etc., just leave those spaces unfilled. Names and contact information are all that is required. The next time you go to your bank take along the form and sign in front of a notary. Mail the form on to the JTC. Letter of response from the JTC regarding your thoughts will be forthcoming.

Brian Downs has been a respected member of Citizens for Parental Rights and Michigan Parental Rights Facebook Page for many years. Downs is an attorney advocating for reform within the family court. Downs is presently running for State Representative of Kent County District 73 in the coming 2014 election.

The issues of Family Court and Child Protective Service are not only found within the Kent County system, they are found nationwide. Families are the very foundation of our nation's society and must be protected in our courts and our legislatures, but mostly by a vigilant people.