Richard, I am not going to 'vote' but I will suggest that possibly the fathers' rights leader is not corrupt but simply confused or deranged. You are seeking justice, and that is commendable. It is possible that he is considering the best chances of fathers having a life with their children, which unfortunately can mean being submissive to harassing officials and corrupt judiciary. In a way, his viewpoint could be corrupt, at least in the short-term, for today's fathers, even though it never improves matters in the long-term for tomorrow's father-victims.

He might well have an inside track on several court matters - a good fathers' rights leader would always try to obtain such information, if they can. Since you are one of those many men who dislike the idea that family courts are too secretive, don't start getting agitated just because the secrecy is not very good. Rather, meet with him, understand his viewpoint, be friendly with him and get all the inside information that you can from him. Feel free to explain your different viewpoint but if he can be of any use to you, don't deliberately alienate yourself.

If he is using his inside knowledge in a manner that is against the interest of fathers generally, even in the short-term, then feel free to expose him, of course. Since you have enough court battles, you might prefer to do this by simply publicising what you know about his actions and shaming him out of his position, or at least making him harmless through having earned everyone's distrust.

I agree with all that Douglas says here.

I can understand your distress Richard but you must resist making enemies where you could be making allies.

Definitely do not play into the hands of the courts by bopping someone on the nose.

Adding a Fathers' Rights chap to a court complaint list is hardly likely to help the situation.

Blackmail is an almost hysterical threat for consideration.

The advice to record everything, all conversations with relevant people (inc the ex-wife) is sound. You can buy a fine spy pen on the internet for under $100. A pen fits nicely and 'normally' in a top pocket or attached to a folder. It is unobtrusive. It can be used to write with even while it records sound and vision for several hours, and can be easily downloaded onto a computer, freeing space for more recording. The internal battery is chargable in a very short time.

I do not know if it admissable evidence in a Polish court, as it is in an Australian one. Here in Oz we have a 'Privacy' legislation that prohibits electronic illegal recording, but section 43 of the Act permits you to record any of your own conversations with other people without their permission or knowledge. They may not be 'broadcast' or otherwise shown to others, unless as in Section 45 they are intended to be used in a legal undertaking.

Check your own national legislation.

Recently, while I was on the street, I bumped into a prosecutor on my case. The prosecutor told me unoffically that the psychologiost who spoke to my son has cleared me of all suspicion, and my son spoke well of me (-:

What he said was "off-the-record". He was slipping you a bit of personal information to make you feel better. It should definitely not be brought into the public domain since it compromises both you and him. A potential friend then becomes your enemy.

[Edititing tools prevent me from making further quotes]
In intensely beaurocratic societies (I live in one), it's easy to make wild, unproven accusations that stay on the record until they are disproven in court or a judge is bribed to throw them out.

I concurr with Douglas and Percy. Play the nice guy; gather allies and evidence, and keep the emotions in check.
"Mental Imbalance" is an unproven accusation. When we are "strangers in a strange land" the incompetent courts always find "Let's Get the Foreigner", to be the easiest game in town. Don't let it rattle you.

Richard,
first, you are in the midst of good news. The prosecutor gave you good information about what your son reported. that's great for you! the system seems to be working in in your case, so you don't want to blow it.
I would take what you heard from the fathers' rights group as a constructive message: work on being calm and appearing calm in the face of these bizarre accusations.
it should appear to anyone that if you make an accusation of filming orgies in front of children, and such a horrendous thing is not true, then something must be seriously wrong with the accuser. and there is guilt by association: you were with this crazy person, you had a child together, the usual blah blah. so something must be wrong with both of you.
so don't ignore what you heard from the head of the fathers' rights group. take it as a heads up that you could be cleared of the charges and still have an image problem. so work on showing through your behavior that you are a responsible, decent person.
as for the calumny charges against your ex, I question whether it's worth your time and energy to pursue stuff like this. she's been shown to be someone who will lie and not hesitate to use her child against you. that's probably enough right there. if the prosecutor did not press charges against her, I'm not sure there's a lot of value in your doing so. you don't want the system to see you both as bitter people who no never miss a chance to take a swipe at the other.
it's an infinite loop until you decide to step out.

Thank you for an honest reply.

I had no doubts that i would be found innocent - its quite easy to prove when one is guilty of such a crime. My problem is that this is the THIRD time the police have been searching my flat - its an annual thing now. Surely the proseuctor should know better.

I did lodge a formal complaint, basing my claim on FIRST the psycho should speak to my son, and then they should search my flat if they had grounds., as the accusations were 6 months old. Thus even if i was guilty, I would have had time to get rid of the "evdience", thus the prosecutor acted in the wrong order, particularly as the search did not need to take place as I had not just committed a crime, but the alledged incident took place a long time ago

The fathers rigths group were basically passing on veiled threats - I complain - it makes me a "troublemaker" - she lodges a report of a crime she is convinced happened and she is not even found guilty of reporting a false crime.

So what comes out of this is that she is scott free to do the same thing again next year (two years ago it was guns and drugs - the half of the anti terrorist police and drug squad were in my flat!) and she feels free from prosecution while the message I get is that I should free happy that I am not guilty? Something not right here.

But still I appreciate your post. Some other pots left me with the feeling that some guys will live on their knees hoping for justice and contact with their kids. Those who act this way deserve neither, for it perpetuates the corrupt system we find ourselves under.

*****
On a side note, it also exposes the potrntial use of psychology/psychiatry for political ends to silence or intimidate people. The hidden message is clear "if you complain, there must be something wrong with you". I met a man recently who has been so scared by such a tactic, you can sense the fear in his aura (he saw children being mistreated at school and the school psychologist attacked him).

Thus I think its time the admins opened up a section on "abuses of psychology against men".

I sympathize with you Richard, I would not want to be in your shoes (I don't think anyone would). The situation with the prosecutor smells fishy, like there is some kind of bribery by your ex just to cause you headaches. Her head is probably aching from the poor decision to leave you, but her nose is too far in the clouds to admit her mistake. Trying to make herself feel better by making others, meaning you, feel worse than she does. So I vote 'C'. Take a recorder and shove it all back in her face.

I don't know, Richard. Someone who makes up outlandish accusations that are consistently proven to be ridiculous... She's not going to be popular with the prosecutor or police next time she cries wolf. Why not show everyone that you're calm and reasonable, the good citizen who is a victim of the crazy ex?
Really sympathize with you, and wish you all the best.

Yes you are 100% right. They refuse to prosecute her for false testimony. She does suffer from aserious mental health problems (and has been hosptialised a few times! under a court ruling). The prosecutor writes:"due to her history she subjectively believes that objectively such events took place..."

My point is she still falsely reported a crime and she should be funished - even if its a symbolic 10 USD fine.

The prosecutor did write "due to the divorce and nature of the conflicts, what ever she says has to be taken with caution...."

But at the end of the day the police still search my flat, and she feels free to make false reports again and again and now can use the excuse of her illness to make her immune from prosecution, while I have to wonder when the police will next comt to search my flat (the searches always happen @ my birthday or Xmas!)

Richard, they will always write, "due to the nature of the conflict," which in code will mean they see you both as the problem. It's idiocy, insane, stupid. You're not the one to blame, but they see you as part of the problem.
You may want to take a look at "Getting Past No", a book about negotiating with difficult people. You are basically negotiating with the police, via your communications, actions.
The book has several recommendations for getting to where you want to be. Two come to mind here. (1) Stand in their shoes. Look at the situation from their point of view. Try to float above and see how you would perceive things. (2) Take a step in their direction, meaning don't do what the other side expects you to do. They've type-cast you. So act inconsistently with that.
If it's possible, maybe you or your lawyer can approach the chief prosecutor positively, have a discussion about the situation and what can be done about avoiding problems in the future, make them want to help you, rather than just going through the motions.
I'd be concerned that filing complaints, going after prosecutorial misconduct, etc, all may be in the general public good, but just won't help your individual case as much as doing things so they will want to help you.

There have been times in history where men have been put into impossible situations. Think, Galley Slaves.

For a time there is little one can do but row the friggin' boat. Until all the rowers agree to kill the guy with the whip and the drum and have the means to break their chains, they are stuck between a hard place and the sea.

But, swearing at the guy with the drum won't help. It will just bring on extra whippings.

Richard,
once again Percy says better and in fewer words what I was trying to articulate. (Damn, you Percy!)
Here are some free materials to help guide you through such a difficult situation, from one of the co-authors of Getting to Yes. This is from Getting Past No. The author's philosophy is "don't get made, or get even - get what you want." And you first need to think long and hard and deep about what you want.
tip sheet is here:
http://www.williamury.com/files/pastnotips.pdf
10 minute audio summary of these points is here:
IDN 102 - Part 2 with William Ury on Negotiating with Difficult People (Dec. 5) > International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution

I understand your persepectives, but the reason why the galley salve IS a galley slave is because he does not stand up and fight.

Is you live on your knees hoping for justice or security, you end up with neither - as one of the founding fathers of the US said.

A friend called me tonight, he needs to find a fathers support group - he laughed at me in my "dont give in" saying he has contacts, etc, and now she has shit on him and he is depressed.

So, yes, dont wake the bear in the cave, but dont also forget the bear is in the cave - and sooner or later he will wake. Perhaps it is best to take on the bear at a time and place of your choosing?!

Better to live and hope and plan you way out than to make matters worse for yourself.

Until all the rowers agree to kill the guy with the whip and the drum ANDhave the means to break their chains