Complaint Review: Judge Cathie B Maher

Why on earth would there be a judge who "nods" when told that a witness has perjured themself and then not do anything about it?  This what Probate Court Judge Cathie Maher did today, when she arbitrarily decided to give my grandson back to his mother.  I know I could stand a few more lessons in how the justice system works, but I never knew that perjury would be encouraged in a courtroom. 

My grandson's mother decided after 6 1/2 years that it was time for her to "take the reins back".  During the time I had the child living with me, she never contributed to his support and at one time, went an entire year without seeing him (he's 8 years-old).  She had not complied with the placement plan for the limited guardianship so the judge modified it.  She was to spend 8 weekends with her son and pay $30.00 a week child support, provide the court with documentation of her income and a lease in her name.  I did not have an attorney, but I had consulted one who gave me some apparent misinformation, which proved pointless. The bottom line is--I was shafted and my grandson forced to live with his mother-6 other siblings and step siblings--and his mother's husband.  I think now the total living in the 3 bedroom house is 9.  Mother picked up son--late and brought him back late;using car problems as an excuse; she only paid one child support payment during the 8 weeks, but miracle of miracles, she paid the balance the day before the final judgment.  But she lied throughout the entire proceedings and even though I tried to present evidence, the judge was not interested.  Mother will probably be prosecuted for food-stamp fraud because she was receiving benefits for her son when he was not living with her (1 lie under oath).  She admitted to two other lies (under oath) and the judge just nodded her head.  I believe the court clerks may have been in collusion with the mother; especially after I saw them huddled together when I came back into the courtroom. 

Now, the original plan stated mother must be able to support herself and child and have a home (lease in her name).  Today, the judge allowed the husband's income to be included with her ability to support child.  What I don't understand is--why?  This is not the husband's child and the biological father was standing right there in the court-room.  Perhaps I missed something, but this seems to be contrary to the original order. 

The bottom line for me is--I need help in finding an attorney who will review my transcripts and see if we get this situation over-turned.  There are two issues that concern me the most--her lack of response to the perjuries and her inclusion of the husband's income. 

I do not have a great deal of money and I'm willing to do a lot of the research (explorations of events) myself.  Please respond soon so that I can possibly get my grandson out of the mess he's in.