PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.
Sunday, May 6, 2018
Thursday, February 11, 2016
ACLU REPORTS ON GOV. MALLOY'S PROPOSAL TO EXTEND JURISDICTION OF JUVENILE SYSTEM UNTIL THE AGE OF 20--WHAT AN ECONOMIC BOON FOR THE CT JUDICIAL BRANCH!
- See more at:
Monday, April 27, 2015
Friday, January 23, 2015
|Proposed Bill No. 641|
January Session, 2015
|LCO No. 2274|
Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY
|SEN. MARKLEY, 16th Dist.|
AN ACT CONCERNING JUVENILE COURTS.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:
That chapter 815t of the general statutes be amended to require that juvenile courts be open to the public.
Statement of Purpose:
To allow open courts in juvenile matters.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
NORM PATTIS ASKS:
"Whose Best Interest Served in Child Custody Cases?
There are secret courts operating in our midst, and I am not referring to those tribunals whose focus is national security. I’m talking about something more basic and closer to home. I’m talking about our juvenile courts, where the fate of children is sometimes determined.
Consider the case of Jane Doe and John Doe, two Connecticut parents stuck in Kafkaesque proceedings. They are in the midst of a divorce. They have three children. Those children are now in foster care, and it is not clear when the parents will again have the right to raise them as they see fit. In fact, it is not even clear when the father will even get to see his children again."
For the full content of this article, please click on the link below: