Monday, October 17, 2011

How Many Sleazy Things Can We Get In One News Story?

This is an October 16, 2011 Los Angeles Times story about a private detective who hires showgirls to get guys going through divorces drunk as a setup for DUI arrests, to impair the child custody question.  Here's one horrifying segment:
Dutcher had been duped.

The women who'd ogled him worked for Butler's detective agency. Sharon, who told Dutcher she was a divorcee employed by an investment firm, actually was a former Las Vegas showgirl.

A man who once worked for Butler had blown the whistle. He told authorities Butler arranged for men to be arrested for drunk driving at the behest of their ex-wives and their divorce lawyers — and that entrapment was only one of many alleged misdeeds.

Butler, 49, a former police officer, was arrested in February. In addition to setting up at least five DUIs, he sold drugs for law enforcement officers and helped them open and operate a brothel, collecting and delivering the profits, according to prosecutors and a statement Butler gave them after his arrest.

In the March 15 statement obtained by The Times, Butler said his accomplices reasoned that they could shield their illegal businesses because any complaints would be investigated by a state-run narcotics task force, which one of the officers headed.

The alleged crimes implicated three different law enforcement agencies — the San Ramon and Danville police departments and the narcotics task force — and took place in Contra Costa County, a collection of mostly middle-class communities that stretch from the East Bay shoreline opposite San Francisco to upscale suburbs inland.
 There is a lot of really horrifying corruption out there--but this takes the cake: dirty police officers, an elaborate setup to complicate matters in divorce cases.  They better throw the book at all of those involved.


  1. In today's world a woman marries a wallet and a man marries the state.

    You do not even begin to comprehend the scope of the depravity that exists in the kangaroo family kourt system in this country. I know you are firmly rooted in the 'Blue Pill' world of Mariage 1.0 and I hate to break it to you but 'Ozzie and Harriet' are in the grave.

    Today's world is a marriage 2.0 world that is rife with corruption and greed. You may be beyond the point of 'Red Pill' reality, for yourself anyway - but for the sake of your son, you owe it to him to educate yourself, and him, on the reality of the world today.

    Here's a good entry point: and the many articles on

  2. Divorce court is a real mess. You can find horrible abuses going on out there, and I can relate some horrors where the women are the victims.

    Our society is in collapse, and what has happened to marriage is one of those indicators. Yet, there are still people who are getting married, and staying married (even happily married) today. But a successful marriage requires a number of steps:

    1. Husband and wife both need to be ready to back away from selfishness. A lot of traditional marriages survived because women were raised to be subservient. Selfless husbands (and there were many of them) could work well in those relationships. Selfish husbands made their wives miserable, but the marriage held together. Now that women are not raised to be subservient--and many are actually raised to be selfish--traditional marriages only work with selfless husbands--and there are fewer of them than there used to be.

    2. Any marriage that is not God-centered is going to have a heck of a time surviving in a culture that is increasingly ME-centered.

    3. Economic stress can create enormous problems for even the strongest marriages. The decision to regard homemaker women as non-sentient beings drove many mothers into the full-time workplace, driving down overall wages, and making it that much harder for traditional families (where the man was the primary or sole breadwinner) to survive.

  3. You are still in the Marriage 1.0 matrix, men in this generation are increasingly realizing that in a Marriage 2.0 world the odds are stacked against them.

    The rate of marriage is at a historical low and the state's perverse incentives are the single biggest factor in that change of society. I go so far as to tell men that in today's legal climate it is (slow) financial suicide to marry.

    1) correct to a point, but women have always had the better bargain in society and were never really subservient role as the feminist viewpoint portrays it - and they have always had a short term time value of resources view (which I think you ascribe to selfishness).

    Some attribute this to the fact that they have traditionally been the gatherer's of a season's bounty, stopping to pick berries where ever they found them - and consume them just as quickly. Men on the other hand were hunters who had to organize themselves to be successful.

    The state has simply codified the short term time preference in favor of women. In today's wold, the mere unsubstantiated accusations of a woman can displace a man from his home, remove him from a meaningful relationship with his children, cost him half of the assets he has earned and for that privilege he will be forced by the state to send an extortion check every month (how much of your salary has the state mandated be earmarked for your children? would you tolerate it?).

    As long as the law is so blatantly skewed against men this trend will continue and accelerate.

    2) belief is for believers - a form of group-think, a tool of tyrants and the opiate of the masses throughout history. Government is simply it's bastard child. YMMV.

    3) I think economic 'stresses' simply exacerbate 1) and amplify existent tendencies.

    Marriage and inter-personal relationships are not, and never were intended to be, an enumerated power of government oversight. It has it's roots in racist motivations of those who seek control over the most intimate aspects of society. And it found a strong ally when feminists coat-tailed on the civil rights movement.

    It is wonderful you have escaped unscathed (so far). Many/most do not. I have known men who have come home from a day at work, providing for their family, to find the home emptied while they were away. I have known men who have taken their own lives under the boot of the kangaroo family court. And I am no longer surprised when a predator family attorney gets gunned down in a parking lot, has his car booby-trapped with a bomb or gets shot down in his office (all happened this year).

    If you truly believed in family and marriage you would support abolishing the kangaroo family kourts and the state provided incentives to women that lead to family destruction. To do otherwise is to be a 'useful idiot' to the destruction of future generations.

  4. Oh I definitely support radical changes in how the system of marriage and family courts operate. The promise first of simplified divorce and then no-fault divorce was that it would reduce the enormous costs associated with divorce and liberate women. It certainly reduced costs, but as even a number of feminists have eventually recognized, the destruction of families did not liberate women at all. It just moved conflict from the home into divorce courts and continual arguments about custody and child support.

    Women did not have the better end of it in society. They were protected in many respects, but also limited in their rights as well. While I find much of the feminist rhetoric about "womyn's history" laughable when it is not utterly false, it does not take much reading of the 19th century to see that women had an inferior situation--and this remained so right into the 20th century. There's a reason that women were active in the temperance movement: they were on the losing end of drunken, violent husbands and fathers.

    I find it interesting that most of the marriages that I have seen that have worked have benefited from the "opiate of the masses." Relatively few people who are free from this ignorant groupthink seem terribly happy. This is something that multiple surveys have confirmed, by the way. Regular participants in religious services consistently report higher levels of happiness and satisfaction with their lives.