No announcement yet.

Judge Vivian Ulrich

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Judge Vivian Ulrich

    A Margaret Wilson appointment (say no more) has retired or has she been given the honerable boot? The closest thing to a father this judge is, is a step mother. She dosent even have her own children, talk about no empathy.

    This judge has been described by Family Court Lawyer's as;

    "Conspicious by her directions"
    "Most people were surprised by her appointment"

    Some of Ulrich's handy work

    Directions made which had detrimental outcomes for the children (a blind Morron could see that would happen), but it seems clear, it's about the mother for Ulrich.

    Directions with out evidence.

    Directions put in place by a family court judge (a clear thinking highly regarded judge) simply removed by Ulrich 15 months later - without reason.

    "The mother manages her gang associations"( she goes to a gang pad, gets trashed and everything else in between)

    "The mother has suicidal thoughts" ( she must manage her gang associations between her suicidal thoughts)

    A temporary protection order granted with out any evidence.

    The father's access stopped with out notice after shared care for six years. (to hell with the children's views prior to this extreme measure)

    It seems this was described as a knee jerk reaction by counsel for the children (after he tabled the children's views five weeks and thousands of dollars later which did not match the without notice directions of her honour) as the children of around thirteen had been unable to spend their time with their father and described themselves as sad and angry because of that.

    This may well be one vindictive old trout who's integrity and professionalism has long been in question. The family court can't improve with judges like this around. Many believe she just had to go, she had become a bigger liability to the court as it tries to convince the public that it's new reforms are good.

    So legal aid is harder for mummy to get now - or so we are told because family court reforms are here.

    Here's a tip for all of you bitter mothers out there.

    If you are wanting to make life difficult for the father, oppose his access, when your lawyer asks if you have any money say no. How about legal aid?

    The lawyer may say legal aid may not be available to deal with a routine access matter. At this point tell the lawyer that he (the children's father) said that he didn't like my nail polish once.

    The lawyer (likely to be keen on legal aid) may reply, ok then that may be regarded as abuse and you could need "a temporary protection order" thus legal aid will likely be granted as domestic violence is alleged.

    So when in need of legal aid for any thing, alleged abuse is the way to go. It appears to be the latest craze from family court parasites in need of revenue via legal aid.

    The in need of revenue lawyer may just simply indicate to the client that if there is any domestic violence alleged legal aid will be made available.

    "Your arse looks fat in those jeans" did he ever say that to you the lawyer may ask, because that may well be a form of abuse that you need protecting from. Come to think of it he did say that he didn't like my cooking- there you go the lawyer may say, psycological abuse, temporary protection order (the old family court father repellant revisited) the lawyer may be heard saying well that will cover my rent and my kids orthodontic care.

    So our reforms take us back to the days when protection orders were dished out like confettie. Of course judges like her honour judge Ulrich could simply make directions without any evidence to support these types of applications and the legal aid gravey train just left the station again. The sad aspect is clearly the children in such circumstances go with out in one form or another as many fathers cant and wont be able to deal with this.

    It is time that lawyers who deal in this type of behaviour are made public. There may be many woman and children who genuinely need protecting but the behaviour described should not be tolerated, it undermines genuine need.
    Last edited by flimflam; 03-03-2015, 12:16 PM.

  • #2
    "Directions put in place by a family court judge simply removed by Ulrich 15 months later - without reason"

    Similar thing to me. When I raised the fact that the Judge I was in front of was changing a direction from a previous Judge, I was told that "he was probably angry." And when I suggested that perhaps the Judge should confer with the previous Judge, I was told to sit down.


    • #3
      So who was the judge who put the first directions in place and which one took them out again?

      After they were reversed, we're the outcomes for the children better or worse?


      • #4
        please tell me you are all just joking and that this is lawyer in jokes or petty arguments ? my case went before judge ulrich , who without any reason cut me off from my children , including my son who has cancer , and has gone out of her way to destroy my life . i have also recently found out about prue vincent who was the child phycoligist in the case as well , i did not know till recently that she has been censured by the medical council , for gods sake there have been protest groups outside her office , surely at some stage common sense should prevail , any way because of all this i have not seen my kids for 5 years , have tried to kill my self , and am living on the bones of my arse , this might be a "game to those of you in the law profession but this is my life that this judge and this phycoligist have destroyed and worse are leaving my children in danger from a psychotic mother .


        • #5
          The good news is that this Troll has recently retired, but not before making a similar ruling earlier this year when she stopped a father seeing his children for 3 months on a whim.