Dear Judge Call
(cc: Jennifer Millner of FOX ROTHCHILD, opposing party)
I apologize if the email didn’t seem important to you. That said I realize the court is available 24/7 for petitions to redress grievances (article 1, par 18, N.J. Const.)
I realize my children aren’t important to the state of New Jersey, it’s been made quite clear to me.
Especially since my wife kidnapped them and made them citizens of Connecticut in 2010, yet the court reserved examination of the issue until trial which ended 2014.
See nothing really indicates how unimportant my children are to New Jersey more than the fact that when a kidnapping was reported, the state did nothing for 4 years allowing the kidnapper to then argue the kids are attached to another state now, so screw NJ and screw Mr. Syphrett.
Best of all the state failed to explain what interest it has in my children – who for 4 years have been citizens of Connecticut.Â They will not / can not qualify for New Jersey Welfare, so what is the state interest. I asked at trial… I got no answer. Again that is part of the reason the child support order is void.
No state can regulate interstate commerce unless it has an interest GREATER THAN THE FEDERAL INTEREST, & REAL PARTY INTERESTS.
New Jersey had an opportunity at trial to state its interest, but Judge Tomasello did not.Â NJ has no financial interest in the children’s welfare, and clearly doesn’t think my children are important.
Judge Tomasello’s conduct is not surprising:
1) He’s been reversed more than most judges,
2) He’s been publicly admonished by a county prosecutor (in the press) for calling intent to commit child-rape a victimless crime (see Post-Courier Newspaper)
[the above paragraph has been corrected to correct: the author’s error in using the term child pornography, instead of “intent to commit child-rape”)
LINK: TOMASELLO & THE VICTIMLESS CRIME OF CHILD INTENT TO COMMIT CHILD RAPE (his words):
3) He was even reversed on the stupid case he allowed into his court regarding DEXTER THE DOG… HE USED TAX PAYER MONEY FOR A DOG CUSTODY CASE… AND HE SCREWED THAT UP TOO.
LINK: TOMASELLO & DOG CUSTODY CASE (REVERSED):
Judge Tomesello personal story shocks me, but I shouldn’t go on about it, obviously nobody cares that he is unfit. I certainly understand why HE IS DIVORCED.
Thanks for considering the shameful circumstances. Have a nice weekend.
Please consider doing the right just thing so we can all lick our wounds and move on without a more public discourse that diminishes the public trust.
Derek C. Syphrett
Kinda strange that Judge Tomasello wanted to sanction me for wasting his time (being late), when he has a history of being the FIRST JUDGE IN HISTORY TO WASTE THE COURT’S TIME ON DOG CUSTODY CASES FOR A COUPLE THAT WAS NEVER MARRIED, FOR A DOG THAT WAS BOUGHT PRIOR TO ANY DATING TELATIONSHIP.
TELL JUDGE TOMASELLO I WANT A REFUND OF MY TAX DOLLARS FOR THAT… SERIOUSLY.
On 6/15/2014 6:24 PM, John Call wrote:
To: John Call
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 4:11:56 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
was read on Sunday, June 15, 2014 6:24:34 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).
Final-recipient: RFC822; John.Call@judiciary.state.nj.us
Disposition: automatic-action/MDN-sent-automatically; displayed
X-Display-Name: John Call