#1 The most outrageous action a judge took in your family court case
“My ex filed contempt against me for any silly thing he could think of. The judge held me in contempt for taking 28 hours instead of the court ordered 24 hours to return an email And finally The Judge held me in contempt and sentenced me to 2 days in jail for adding 17 minutes to my ex’s commute time.”
|
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Unstoppable Mothers Alliance International: Jailed for Commute Time
Saturday, November 14, 2015
Theatre4Justice
https://www.facebook.com/Theatre4Justice/videos/977651252338543/
Dear NJCDLP and Theatre for Justice Board Members as well as Administrators:
Posted on Facebook is a short video promoting and encouraging contributions to our Theatre for Justice (T4J). While the video is a fundraising tool, we are counting on it to raise awareness of T4J most of all. I suspect that few grassroots advocates consider T4J's tremendous potential as a public awareness and fundraising tool for people tackling causes as controversial as ours tend to be. T4J and Drum Majors for Truth are our most marketable initiatives in that they at least qualify for institutional funding opportunities.
Please take time to "like" and widely share our T4J video on Facebook. Neither NJCDLP nor T4J are really ready for more major fundraising at this time. I hope to make substantial progress in getting us ready for that corporate function between now and first quarter 2016. But in the meantime, please consider reaching out for a contribution to T4J among your acquaintances who could perhaps afford a gift of $25-$100 or so.
Eugenia, Shreya, Jill, and Michael . . . I do have an audited statement of T4J's income and expenditures to date. Please let me know if you would like to receive a copy.
Thank you Sarah for narrating our T4J promotional video. You did a fantabulous job! To view our final product: CLICK HERE
Enjoy :-)
Zena
The Mysterious Case of the Crime Victim Who Could Not File Criminal Charges
The Mysterious Case of the
Crime Victim Who Could Not File Criminal Charges
Against Her Assailant...............
Passaic County – 20014 – 20015
A Wayne Township resident brutally, physically attacked by a male
neighbor in front of her home, in the
presence of her husband, has found it impossible to pursue criminal charges
against her alleged assailant in Passaic County Courts.
The alleged victim of assault
was physically jumped upon by the person described as her assailant. He is said to have dropped her
to the pavement, beat and pounded her
head while grasping her hair, bobbing up and down like a yo yo, so that he
could bang her head into the pavement with repeated thrusts. She feels that she
escaped death by pummeling and pounding by biting the assailant on the hand.
Wayne Township police charged the victim with assault for biting the accused
perpetrator.
The Wayne resident was
admitted to a local hospital, treated for head and neck injuries. Pictures of
the victim taken at the time of
hospitalization indicate two badly blackened eyes, a severely bruised
forehead and a face swollen to twice normal dimensions as compared to pictures
taken in close time proximity for comparison of facial features. The victim's
neck was immobilized in a neck brace, but months later acute headaches and
chronic tinnitus – ringing in the ears, leading to dizziness have nearly
immobilized this crime victim.
The charges filed against the
assailant were Aggravated Assault and simple assault.
The assault case went to the
Grand Jury where they found a No Bill. Criminal charges against the accused
perpetrator were not favorably ruled upon presumably because the alleged
perpetrator was also framed as a possible victim as per the way charges were
filed, indicating that the alleged perpetrator was bitten. The suggestion that
a diminutive woman in her early sixties, standing in front of her house, on her
lawn, with her husband, jumped on a passing neighbor and bit him on the hand
appears preposterous, yet these appears to be the scenario presented to a grand
jury.
Civil charges have now been
filed in court, involving complaints against the Wayne Township Police
Department. The charges are mysteriously rife with incorrect information. It
appears that charges filed internally, erroneously report the crime as a
“domestic violence dispute. The victim is a diminutive woman in her early 60's.
The perpetrator of assault is described as a man in his early 50's, heavy set,
close to 6 feet tall. The charges that seem to have been filed involve a
complaint written up as a “domestic violence complaint between two men”, which
was never the case. Attempts to procure the written police reports and
complaints have been unsuccessful, though the clients lawyers have made
numerous requests to receive this complaint. The suggestion that the assault
took place as a domestic violence dispute thoroughly erroneously alters the
context of the complaint.
Friday, November 13, 2015
Thursday, November 12, 2015
FROM THE DESK OF JILL JONES-SODERMAN RICO REIGNS IN H0WARD COUNTY MARYLAND
From the Desk of Jill
Jones-Soderman
10/15/2015
THE CANNIBAL COURTS
RICOH REIGNS IN HOWARD COUNTY
MARYLAND
RECONSIDERED AND MOVING ON
The raw rage exploding from
the repressed fury experienced with the grief of multiple black lives taken
over the past year makes us wonder where is the fury, not yet vented in the
wake of so many children lost in the foul atmosphere of the Howard County
Courts.
The coordinated efforts of the
consortium of Judges, McCrone, Gelfman,
and others, guardian ad litem
such as Alyssa Cummins, “Child Protective Services”
caseworker's dark presence, in
the person such as Bobbi Feher, present a formidable phalanx to vulnerable,
protective parents. Most individuals who labor under the illusion that hiring
an attorney and presenting evidence in court, re: domestic violence, child
sexual abuse, physical and emotional abuse, will result in the protection and
care of their child/children.
The nightmare that awaits
protective parents, however wealthy, intelligent, sophisticated they may be,
cannot be imagined when they are faced with the onslaught of the organized mob
of selected actors, attorney Christopher
Rand, psychologist, custody evaluator, Paul Bermnan Phd, Best Interest
Attorney, Alyssa Cummins. The list of alleged predator professionals is
considerable. Those noted are ones we have personally seen in action, experienced
their barbarism and the aftermath of their cruelty, such as Paul Dasher PhD of
New Jersey. The actors are interchangeable as per jurisdiction but their
nauseating deeds are burned into the hearts and minds of their victims, and
spectators, each experience unique and perpetually personal. We have their
reports, records as well as our responses to their calumny, alleged lies and
multiple acts of alleged malfeasance.
Motivation for such acts is suspected to be
huge pay days coming from client fees for legal defenses which mask horrible
acts of physical, emotional, sexual abuse on the part of the predator parent
seeking to hide venal acts and or to perpetuate their crimes. Another insight
into the motivations for such coordinated efforts and cover ups comes with
greater knowledge and experience into the possessed world of child traffickers,
pornography and the variety of
alleged perverts who populate the courts for personal gain or giving expression
to their own private, but shared form of perversion. The family court provides an ample hunting
ground for the provision of victims of all sorts as well as those whom seek to
cover their crimes – gratification provided on all fronts.
It is interesting to note that
in family courts, abusers can by-pass the criminal justice system by relying on
the “discretion of the judge” who can discretely demure to prosecute a
predator, claiming that a child “lies, manipulates, has plotted, with the
protective parent, against the predator. Judge Lenore Gelfman of Howard County
Family court spontaneously made an “executive decision” and pulled a case of
child pornography and suspected trafficking, off of the trial track and
“safely” into mediation.
Further, Gelfman allegedly
made a deal to offer one of the two children, girls, to the predator father and
the other to the mother in a couture custody package. Reputedly, this took care of the case.
Attempts to bring this case to
the Attorney General's office as per discussion with a State Attorney –
Jennifer Ridder, Esq. for District Court, met with complete resistance and
denial that the police refused to investigate the case, despite the existence
of hard evidence of child pornography. Submission of evidence of pornography in
the complaint sent to Judge Lenore Gelfman was pulled from the evidence
submissions in the court complaint, allegedly by Family Court Judge Lenore
Gelfman.
The failure to pursue
investigation of the child pornography evidence or to engage investigation of
the known individual initiating pornography, the father of the teen age girl,
raises questions as to why investigation was not pursued and why Judge Lenore
Gelfman pulled this case from the trial track and placed it into mediation. The
thought that mediation resolved the case by splitting custody with a father
engaged in the alleged production of pornography, using his daughter as a
subject raises such questions as to whether or not Lenore Gelfman is herself
engaged in the cover up of the production of pornography in Howard County or is
somehow complicit in same.
There was extensive knowledge
of the Jase Bouma case which documented abuse of a child over years, by Bobbi
Feher, CPS caseworker, report of CPS 2014. The case report was heard in the court of Judge Becker in
2014......Becker’s only concern was to sanction any lawyer whom may have
revealed the case which was published with the full intent of drawing attention
to the depraved indifference to the suffering of a child. Becker's intention
was to induce a chilling effect on the attorneys in court by referring the case
leak of the sealed file to the state's attorney …......... . Becker and everyone in that court knew
exactly who leaked and published that CPS report.The person was in the court
room but beyond the control of jurisdiction of the court. The ludicrous charade
played out by all court actors and attorneys whose indifference to the child's
welfare and suffering was nauseating.
With 20/20 hind sight
questions as to the involvement of all members of the legal, mental health
community, CPS group involved in the Jase Bouma case may in fact have ties to
illicit sexual activity, pornography and child trafficking. Judge Lenore
Gelfman was among the cast of characters whom acted in a manner of depraved
indifference and excessive cruelty to Jase Bouma and his protective parent
Laura Bouma.
Other members of the crew whom an earlier monograph indicated the
choreography of a racketeering conspiracy which included, Judge McCrone, Judge
Becker, attorney for the viciously abusive father, whose behavior was reported
and detailed in among other documents, a 35 page report by a mandated reporter.
This report was discredited by Bobbi Feher who lied in her CPS report that was
prepared for the court appearance before Judge Becker.
Judge Becker filed crippling
financial sanctions against the protective parent, Laura Bouma in the amount of
$28,000. Monetary sanctions against Laura Bouma were filed instead of the
recommendation, by attorney Christoper Rand, attorney for the father/ accused
child abuser, to have Laura Bouma psychiatrically hospitalized because she
brought legal actions in the Howard County courts to have her child released
from the sadistic strangle hold otherwise known as custody, held by her ex-husband
Jason Bouma.
Jason Bouma called the
mandated reporter to threaten the mandated reporter stating “You have no idea
what I am capable of”. The mandated reporter who filed complaints against Jason
Bouma and sought to have child abuse charges filed against Jason Bouma filed police reports against
Jason Bouma thus documenting the call.
The child's mother who made
every possible effort to remove her son from a thoroughly deadly situation in
which the child repeatedly expressed fear for his own safety, in a factual,
thoroughly accurate manner described in great detail the circumstances of
personal fear and jeopardy in which he was forcibly maintained.
The level of sadistic,
calculated, intent to maintain this child in a position of intense suffering
was documented and memorialized by CPS case worker Bobbi Feher. The child's
father was maintaining him in a position of severe neglect, abuse, indifference
and immanent harm by maintaining him in the custody of a father whose abuse was
thoroughly documented not only in the words memorialized by CPS case worker
Bobbi Feher whose cruel and punishing, dismissive behavior was thoroughly
documented by a mandated reporter who complained vociferously against Bobbi
Feher to substantiate abuse of a child whose statements, description of
circumstances of immanent harm, related to descriptions by the child drunken
driving.
The now, not so secret weapon
of the Family Court, Dr. Paul Berman is a special type of alleged deviate. Berman is one
who up close and personally tricks and deceives children in their homes, in
their bedrooms, in the company of their loved parents. We have interviewed and
heard the unfolding of events dealing with Paul Berman, from children and
adults, harmed by Berman. We have heard stories of how Berman has cried on the
living room floor of one child, stated by Berman, out of sadness for what the
child endured. The tears did not impede Berman's capacity to order no contact
between the child and her beloved parent. Berman's assassination of character,
psyche, imposition of the coup de gras phrase, the “parent is of danger to the
child'” is the spring board for the alert judge to terminate parental rights
and to order supervised visitation to another sector of the killing field. The
factotum member, visitation supervisor paid off by extraordinary fees for court
ordered supervision with a child whom the parent, until recently was the major
or sole custodian is another nefarious actor in the dismantling of a child's
life and in the service of hiding the secrets of the perpetrator/predator
parent whom has paid for Berman's services.
Berman is notorious in his
protocol for destruction, implementing the same techniques over and over again.
It is only when one is able to compare the numerous reports for boys, girls,
older, younger, but the story is always the same. The phrases delivering
complete destruction, irreparable as part of the chain of command used to
buttress false
evidence produced through the
false instructions provided to parents completing psychological tests where
their identity is pinned to their positioning on a bell curve.
We have reports that Berman
altered test scores and answers to tests by informing subjects as to exactly
how to fill out tests, or in fact filled in scores himself to portray the best possible
or worst possible picture.
Berman was appointed to
Governor O'Malley's prestigious mental health pane.
From the Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman: Cannibal Courts - Failure of Judicial Accountability
From The Desk of Jill
Jones-Soderman
The Cannibal Courts
Failure of Judicial Accountability
10/14/2015
The Foundation stands for Judicial accountability in Family
courts across the country.
Family Court has been notorious for an arbitrary and
capricious standard within each court, much less
any form of reliable standard between state jurisdictions,
much less regional or national reliability. The cult of personality in
conjunction with a reputation for rabidly blatantly corrupt, irrational, brutal
decisions on behalf of Judges seen as without mercy or logic
is the prevailing view of
legal practice
provided to families in distress in Family courts across the country.
Families in distress have become disenfranchised from an
ability to gain access to legal representation because of the excessive cost of
legal services. Families in a low to middle class range of income have, across
the board become incapable of preserving the integrity of their families or
able to protect vulnerable children from
institutional ravages. Transfer
of children from the hands of protective parents into the hands of sexual predators,
obsessed abusers, bent on partner revenge or predatory access to children, have
become a staple story of the endless ravages of dealing with Family court
litigation. The Factory Farming culture of “Child Protective Services”
characterized by removal of children for purposes of funneling money from the
Federal government to the states for a litany of all too often trumped up
medical, psychiatric, educational, treatment services is another scenario
associated with family court. Another unfair practice associated with family
court is the practice of re- assigning children from poor families to wealthier
families, a form of social engineering, not based on parental adequacy, but social/financial need.
The facts of the factory farm system which accurately
describes the level of functioning of Family courts across the country are
staffed with lawyers considered to be “bottom feeders” who like pirannas, ravage the financial, emotional/intellectual
resources of their clients. Clients are all too often left without their children, homes, jobs, friends,
relatives after being subject to the ravages of a family court litigation
process. The level of bias can, for example be seen in the practices of
irregular reporting for investigation,
false or contradictory information on a case information statement, which
should either be clarified, or reported to IRS. Issues of violence toward
children, child sexual abuse notoriously fail to be properly investigated. Proper investigation, as per this writer, means
investigation by police, forensic medical exams, referral to a child advocacy
centers and or referral to the prosecutors' office.
Investigation does
not, under any circumstances mean referral to “child protective services'”, or continued direction by Judicial discretion.
The untrained staff, massive bureaucracy, prejudicial features related to
Federal Rules of Evidence creates significant problems with regard to the
accuracy and credibility of material submitted, mitigates against litigants to
access records or to verify the legitimacy of records submitted. Over all lack
of transparency, a litigation process fraught with a high level of complex
technical intellectual and procedural content, causes reliance on a virtual guild
of practitioners, severely limits basic fairness and allows for the process to
be severely tainted with a combination of bias and larceny.
Further, issues that relate to the criminal nature of crimes
insinuated should not be left to the peripatetic
temperment of Judges discretion in Family court. Family court
is the only arena where children can be confined to the custody of a pedophile,
trafficker; where a protective parent is thoroughly excluded and punished for
attempting to rescue a child from the hands of an abuser.
From The Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman Re: Child Protective Services
FROM THE DESK OF JILL JONES-SODERMAN Re: “CHILD PROTECTIVE
SERVICES”
In recent weeks for April and May the Foundation has received
several new referrals related to the agency held responsible for Child
Protection called CPS, DPS, DCFS, DYFS. Different acronyms cover names from agencies
in different states. Our referrals have
come from New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland across the country to
Nevada, Texas and California yet the same core issues remain in common for all.
The commonality that they share is a frightening level of
power to swoop into the lives of families, removing children based on
allegations formulated by court appointees, defended and or employed by the
Attorney General's office, all who benefit from the power and authority they
wield both financially and as to ego gratification from the control over the
lives of those unfortunate enough to come into the spectrum of their control.
The power of If I say so, It is True is overwhelming to confront especially
when confronting such falsehoods subjects the accuser to spectacular levels of
hurled insults and threats from all adversaries – Judges, lawyers, physician,
psychologists, social workers all in control of information and sources of
information – witnesses - on whom the defense must depend.
These agencies benefit from the ability to control the
acceptability of the evidence that they submit to the court because if they say
that a document is “Certified” it is expected to be accepted by the court as
factual and true when in fact the document can contain absolutely false
information which can be easily proved to be erroneous. Among our recent cases
documents submitted stated that a child was adopted in one state, yet other
government documents proved the child in question to have been born to the
family accused of abuse in a totally different state. Blank documents were
submitted stating that a child had no vaccinations. The accurately certified document
submitted in 2013 by our defense showed the child to have received all
vaccinations in a timely manner. Further, the child in question could not have
attended school if not having been vaccinated. Our documents substantiated that
the child had attended school.
Further, these agencies are able to protect their documents
from scrutiny by classifying them as ” Confidential”. This fact means that
various professionals who work with these agencies can rise in the ranks of
power, authority and notoriety by currying favor with these agencies, referring
cases and having those cases substantiated for whatever claim the agency wishes
to hurl at vulnerable subjects. These agencies can then accrue Federal Funding
through Social Security and other
financial rewards that can be tapped through Health and Human
Services. Preying on vulnerable populations by the manipulation of power and
control is a lucrative business joined by all to many professionals.
Confrontation, piercing the veil of secrecy and exposing theft and fraud is the
only antidote to fraud, deception and bureaucratic manipulation of power and
authority which results in the sanctioning of child abuse in all forms, transfer of children
from poor families to wealthy families based on financial status and the death
of numerous children because faulty/inadequate assessment skills.
THE FOUNDATION FOR THE CHILD VICTIMS OF THE FAMILY COURTS
GOES WHERE OTHERS FEAR TO TREAD.
CHILDREN TRANSFERRED BY FAMILY COURTS INTO THE HANDS OF ABUSERS
THE FOUNDATION FOR
THE CHILD VICTIMS OF THE FAMILY COURTS PRESENTS
A CALL FOR A
NATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS RAISING EVENT FOR PARENTS OF
CHILDREN
TRANSFERRED BY FAMILY COURTS INTO THE HANDS OF
ABUSERS
HOW
DOES THIS HAPPEN?
The Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts is
asking that all citizens become aware of a plague on our children represented by the ability of courts
to remove parental rights, transfer children into the hands of obsessed abusers
whom are then allowed by law and unethical medical, legal, mental health
providers to physically and emotionally devastate children. Children removed
from a protective parent into the hands of a parent whom has defamed a former
spouse for revenge and or profit motives can isolate a child (children) by
totally excluding the protective parent from any form of contact or reporting
to police, child protective services or any further court intervention through
custodial control.
The ingredients for a
criminal enterprise in the Family Court involve an association of “criminally
like minded” cohorts. A “criminally
inclined” attorney with contacts in the
world of corrupt providers critical to custody assignment, criminally inclined
judges, agreeable to pass on the suppression of evidence which would reveal
perpetrator behavior, criminally
responsive mental health providers, willing to assign unfounded toxic diagnoses
to unwitting parents, guardian ad litem, who file false reports and opinions,
expert witnesses and other court associated and assigned actors willing to aid
and abet criminal activities in the courts, create the fabric of corrupt courts in which children are
exchanged on the basis of money and power.
Protective parents whom have lived this phenomenon need no
explanation for the experience referred to in this petition. For those whom
have not experienced this devastating phenomenon, no
explanation is possible, but we encourage you to read
USWHISTLEBLOWER.ORG, the online press for the FCVFC.ORG and become aware.
The Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts
(FCVFC.ORG) encourages the public to contact their legislative representatives
to ask for the creation of courts governed by the rule of law, free of massive
racketeering. Protect children from obsessed abusers whom isolate children from
a protective parent for purposes of unchallenged access to control for goals of
devastating abuse and destruction.
The metamorphosis of courts as sanctuaries of law and order
into lucrative trading floors where the
rich and powerful come for trafficking must end.
From the Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman "Why Cops Lie"
From the Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman
Commentary on the Article
- “Why Cops Lie”
As to the experience of staff of the Foundation for the Child
Victims of The Family Courts, we find that there is a globally cynical view of a parent who files a
complaint – or even asks a question of police, where the back story
involves custody litigation. We have
found that police immediately take a position that the person making the call
is somehow making a false accusation against the other party, or somehow
looking to establish an excuse for “getting away with ….....”something!
In one instance a call to local police in the midst of a
major snow storm, occasioning road closures in the New York tri state area
regarding a specific area was met with a barrage of questions as to why the caller was asking such
questions. A direct response to the question which involved the driving of a
child to a parent after a visit and an attempt to gauge time and driving
conditions with storm conditions was followed by a team of officers being sent to the home of
a domestic violence victim for a well check on the child and demands that the
parent provide the name and number of the parent to whom the child was being
returned so that officers could “investigate”.
With the intervention of the FCVFC at the time of the event,
this over reach of demands for investigation where there was no probable cause
for any police intervention was stopped. A complaint filed with the officer in
charge of this police jurisdiction was met with completely appropriate internal investigation, an apology to our client and an assurance that
future interventions would be handled with insight and discretion. The FCVFC
appreciated the response of the Chief and said so in writing.
The Foundation always deals with adverse actions experienced
by our clients with a response that takes in consideration for the immediate
protection of our client's rights as well as the public policy issues central to
the presenting problem which threatened our client.
From the Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman - Walter Davis
THE FOUNDATION FOR THE CHILD VICTIMS OF THE
FAMILY COURTS
A NOT FOR PROFIT
ORGANIZATION
From the Desk of Jill
Jones-Soderman
10/14/2015
When I joined the ranks of the
prestigious Walter Davis Enterprises Organization, I joked with Walter that as
his organization has international scope, “I can now see Russia from the studio”.
Little did I know that Walter
would shortly be delivering Russia, as Civil and Human Rights know no
boundaries. The scope of influence, generous, sincere, profound concern for those in grave danger do
not escape the influence and willingness of Walter Davis' intervention.
From the Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman - Mr. Spitzer
From The Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman
The Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts is
committed to filing complaints against
court officials, expert witness providers to the courts and
all court actor, on behalf of our clients. We often publish those complaints as
part of writing that elucidates the core issues of concern to the Foundation.
We want the public to be aware that writing a general
complaint about a provider is not adequate. That complaint must be forwarded to
the licensing board that supports this providers' services to the public.
Complaints against Richard Spitzer are familiar to the
Foundation and a copy of a complaint filed against Mr. Spitzer and his organization
are published under” Articles of Interest” - FCVFC.ORG.
From the Desk of Jill Jones-Soderman #2
FROM THE DESK OF JILL JONES-SODERMAN #2
As per many years of work, observation, interaction and expert witness experience with family courts
across the United States that all levels of Judges, Referees...... are over
worked as to the enormous case loads they are asked to handle. Salaries for the
work load and enormity of significance of cases adjudicated are certainly not
commensurate with the weight and impact of the responsibility that they handle.
We have no question that many Judges struggle to handle the
enormity of their tasks with ethical,
judicial fairness, attention to the due process owed to litigants, lack of bias
and attention to scientific
rigor. On the other hand, the clients who reach the attention
of the Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts are individuals
whom have abandoned their sacred trust to the public. These individuals handle
cases by reducing case loads via transferring children to the highest bidder –
that individual who can financially out bid the parent without matching funds
to fight costly custody cases.
When custody is transferred to the parent with superior
financial prowess, despite that parent's qualification, or in fact , despite
that parent's qualification, this may be a means of in fact reducing case loads because the parent whom
has lost custody may be expected to not return to court.
The tactics for ganging up against one parent in favor of
another involve the collusion of a team of court actors involving the Judge,
lawyer, guardian ad litem (lawyer for the child) mental health staff,
government agencies. This tactic may involve interventions such as delaying or
denying a financially challenged parent legal counsel, even when that parent is
legally/financially qualified to receive such service. Foundation staff have
seen on multiple occasions court staff affiliate with one parent against
another. Court staff will speak with the child/children in the custody of the
identified preferred parent
with the parent present. The parent without custody has just
had counsel appointment delayed or denied. The court personnel then state that
they cannot speak to that parent because they do not have counsel – a clear
contradiction in terms.
That parent in question may in fact, in court, choose to act
as a pro se litigant, or for the purposes of dealing immediately with court
personnel seeing their children have the right to act as a pro se litigant and
not have to have an attorney. The court's delay or refusal for the “outcast”
parent in fact leaves that parent totally impotent as to intervention in the
process of providing information to court appointed staff. This level of bias,
aided by a paucity of the court interviewers of children to know/understand the
context and content/meaning of what information provided is nothing less than
outrageous.
Another tactic, one of many is the capacity for court
officials to, via ex parte communication behind the scenes, agree to deprive
the challenged parent fighting for inclusion of their evidence, an accurate
picture of the parent controlling court support and control of custody when
that parent's character and motivation is seriously in question. The ability of
different areas of the court as per differing Judicial authorities such as
Domestic Violence Court, which may issue a Temporary or Permanent Restraining
order, to agree to deprive a parent seeking court protection to in fact deprive
the parent of that protection in order to support the pending case in Custody
Court. Evidence submitted in Domestic court may be viewed as not rising to the
bar of evidence necessary when in fact that evidence does rise to the bar of
evidence. The capacity of Judges to be familiar with the nature of Risk
Assessment, Medical information, Educational supports required by a child
should not be subject to the OPINION
of the Judge who is to be the FINDER OF FACT not the generator of opinion.
In the Expert Assessment of the Experts of the Foundation for
the Child Victims of the Family Courts
no parent should ever enter family court without Expert
Witness Testimony and NO JUDGE should ever be allowed to preside over critical
technically based content without the independent judgment of an expert
witness.
While there is much discussion maligning the expertise of
expert witnesses being no more than
“HIRED GUNS, ” TRUE EXPERTS demonstrate their expertise by well
documented hard evidence,
not psychobabble or hearsay.
The issue of education of judges related to mental health,
parenting, risk assessment issues is limited to non existent. The educability
of Judges is a subject of considerable study, generally indicating that Judges
are highly resistant to entertaining objective knowledge.
The research conducted by paralegal staff of the Foundation
and reviewed by our legal staff is derived from current legal findings culled
through Appeals Court findings as well as material located through services
that provide material on legal topics as well as fresh material located through
PhD Dissertations which provide up to the moment research and theory.
Our observation of
Judicial Opinion dating back to a first case awarding custody to a mother
instead of a father because the Judge approved of the traditional mid western
views of the mother and her family as opposed to the intellectually inquisitive
“bohemian views” of the father is thoroughly contrary to anything other than
arbitrary bias. THIS STANDARD OF ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS WOULD NOT STAND UP TO
APPROVAL IN CRIMINAL COURTS OR COURTS OF EQUITY, WHY SHOULD IT HOLD UP IN
FAMILY COURT?
Stop Forced Marriages of Children
http://www.write.amnestyusa.org/case/burkinafaso/?ac=W1510EEAUTO2C
Thank you for taking action!
Please take a moment to also take action on a serious case in Burkina Faso. In Burkina Faso, young girls are forced into marriages with far older men. Girls like Maria, who was just 13 when her father forced her to marry a 70-year-old man who had five other wives. When she resisted, he told her: "If you don't go to join your husband, I will kill you."
Take Action: Speak out for girls like Maria in Burkina Faso.
In solidarity,
Zeke Johnson
Director, Individuals at Risk
Amnesty International USA
P.S. If you've already taken action for girls in Burkina Faso, we're counting on you in the coming months to help us stand up for human rights everywhere. Get started right now by writing letters to free prisoners during our annual Write for Rights event!
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Pedophile Speak
The Foundation For The Child Victims Of
The Family Courts
 |
| Jill Jones Soderman |
PEDOPHILE
SPEAK
A pedophile father looks at his two year
old daughter taking a bath:
“ She's really getting a figure”
A pedophile father looks at his new born
daughter – at an hour old:
“Wow – She's a real
looker.........She's really hot. She's going to be the real beauty in the
family”.
A
pedophile father musing about the twelve year old daughter of his new wife, a
mother of five children............
“She's really hot. What am I
going to do when she gets to be eighteen, the age I really like their bodies”
The answer was that his step
daughter became the girlfriend of a pot bellied
middle aged pedophile. Their
relationship was interrupted by her mother's divorce and the need for him to
flee the state to avoid criminal prosecution by moving to another state.
Family Courts Put Wonderful Mothers in Insane Asylums
Cynthia Monteiro Elias and Tanis Brandon shared Bill Windsor'sphoto.
Bill Windsor in United States.
FAMILY COURTS PUT WONDERFUL MOTHERS IN INSANE ASYLUMS. THIS MUST STOP.
The Family Courts in America are horribly broken. It is a great big money machine. And the victims are children, mothers, fathers, grandparents, and families.
Maybe some fathers get sent to Insane Asylums, but I have never heard of one -- only mothers who are not crazy as far as I can tell. Psychiatrists get paid a fortune for doing court-ordered psychological evaluations. Who can believe that so many women who get into custody battles are automatically deemed unstable enough to need a psych eval? I don't believe it for a second.
I personally have interviewed absolutely wonderful, normal mothers who have been put through this HELL.
The only thing insane is this criminal racketeering enterprise disguised as Family Court.
The jails are full of people waiting to stand trial, and the prisons are full of people with medical problems (drugs and alcohol). Mental institutions are apparently filled with mothers who simply want to protect their children.
If all the mothers would join together, they could fix this. I recommend PMA - Protective Mothers Alliance. There are just as many bogus "mother's groups" as there are bad judges. I know Janice Levinson and PMA, and I know they have the right intentions.
Ask people you come in contact with if they realized that local courts were putting mothers into Insane Asylums when they are involved in a custody battle. The average person will be shocked.
Then ask them if they were aware that government "officials" routinely strip parents of their parental rights -- take their name(s) off their children's birth certificates.
Only in in Lawless America.
Fathers get victimized as much as mothers in Family Court. Very often, it is the mother (ex-wife) who lies her a$$ off to screw the Dad. Testilying is a disease in courts worse than Ebola. The vindictiveness of mothers against fathers and fathers against mothers is sickening.
Fathers get sent to jail for non-payment of child support. Sorry, but I don't think that should be a crime. Fathers and mothers should pay fair child support as long as they have the ability, but they shouldn't go to prison if they can't pay.
We need jury trials in Family Court. Take the power to destroy lives out of the hands of a single, easily-corrupted judge, and put that power in the hands of a jury composed of half men and half women.
written by Bill Windsor, Producer and Director of Lawless America...The Movie.
Here is a video in which Bill Windsor presents Proposed Legislation for Family Courts -- https://youtu.be/mWWA2FXyEU4
Seems there is a shortage of places to care fr the real mentally ill --http://www.sctimes.com/…/resources-strained-menta…/32474905/
Bill Windsor knows lawlessness and corruption first-hand. Here's a summary of his story -- http://lawlessamerica.com/index.php…
Photo copyright pennsylvaniadiscussion.forumotion.com
Speak Out Against Child Sexual Abuse Supported By Family Courts
The Foundation for the Child Victims
of the Family Courts
A Not for Profit
Organization
This Order Was Meant to Be A Death
Sentence From This Judge
Two Children Sentenced to the Exclusive
Control of Their Abuser
The Veil of Silence and Secrecy
Will Not Be Observed
We Will Publish, We Will Speak, We
Will Enlist Help!!!!
gofundme..........
bracelets
Speak Out
Against
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE SUPPORTED BY FAMILY
COURTS
Family Court Is No Place
for Abused Children
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
'THIS IS OUR ROLE'- WHEN INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IS NECESSARY
'This is our role'
WHEN INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM IS NECESSARY
Sunday’s Log Cabin presented a case to the public that has been tied up in local courts for seven years. When we were first approached to tackle the issue, there was a series of questions we asked internally to determine if this type of involved and lengthy investigation was feasible for our publication.
“Who would this benefit?”
“Why would people care?”
“Is there a way to resolve the issue? Can we improve on the situation?”
“Is this our role?”
Yes, it was determined: “This is our role.”
Our courts and crimes reporter took on the task of establishing a chain of evidence that would be presented fairly. This was not easy, as much of the original documents would be requested through Freedom of Information Act and dug up from archives and storage buildings . It was an assignment that ebbed and flowed with the investigation and what it would ultimately lend for our readers.
The Log Cabin made every effort to uncover the facts. The question we presented to our readers and the community was “Where and when to prosecute?” We poured through the mounds of paperwork, including more than 2,000 pages of a transcript, trying to find out at what point a custody battle should have become acriminal investigation , ultimately to benefit two minor children involved.
Once on the path of the story, we came to several forks in the road over nearly five months of investigation. There was a lot more to the case we presented. There was a lot of hearsay and speculation, but we only printed what could be corroborated with evidence and fact. Once the story was written, the task was to present it fairly and with as little confusion as possible.
We talked to lawyers and judges involved. We obtained police and prosecutor’s reports and evidence presented in open court. All of the editorial staff supported the effort for fairness and understanding to benefit our readers with edits and questions along the way.
That is why the printed version of the newspaper played such an important role in storytelling. We could literally lay it out on paper so readers could follow the piece with references and resources.
The next phase of the story will be to follow the appellate process and to report resolution as it happens, and the Log Cabin is committed to that resolution.
This is our role.
The Log Cabin editorial board is made up of Publisher Zach Ahrens, VP of Audience/Editor Kelly Sublett and Assistant Managing Editor Brandon Riddle.
'THAT IS NOT MY ROLE' - JUDGE'S RULING RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT WHEN AND WHERE TO PROSECUTE...
'THAT IS NOT MY ROLE'
JUDGE'S RULING RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT WHEN, WHERE TO PROSECUTE
(Editor’s Note: The Log Cabin Democrat made the decision to pursue this story following a compelling amount of evidence that spurred questions about the lack of criminal investigation in a case involving the alleged sexual abuse of two minor children in Faulkner County.
After months of exclusive effort on behalf of the Log Cabin Democrat, Freedom of Information requests from law enforcement and the 20th Judicial District, compelling interviews from lawyers close to the case and an alleged victim, we were pre- pared to construct this story.
It is a case that spans seven years and has been on the desks of dozens of health professionals, Department of Human Services case workers, several local judges and a host of other key players.)
Key Players
(Editor’s Note: The following is a list of key players in a case that has lasted more than seven years in the 20th Judicial District. This element is intended for reference purposes only. No implications are intended.)
H.G. Foster
Judge H.G. Foster is the 5th Division Circuit Judge in Faulkner County. He presided over Daniel Coker V. Ardith Mossholder, a custody trial that took place in September of 2013 after five years of litigation. Foster gave temporary guardianship of the two minor children to Daniel Coker’s mother after acknowledging that “there is sufficient reason to believe these children could be in danger of abuse if left in the custody of their father.”
He also acknowledged that Coker lived with his mother and said he would not change that situation. He left the order temporary, which means it cannot be appealed. On Tuesday, July 7, five days after the Log Cabin questioned him about the temporary ruling, he signed a permanent order giving Coker’s mother permanent guardianship of the children. The order reads that the allegations against Coker of sexual abuse are unfounded and not shown to be true. The order also prevents anyone having anything to do with the case from disclosing personal information regarding the case to anyone and prevents Mossholder from having any contact with the children until she undergoes counseling to address all issues in an evaluation performed by Paul Deyoub, Ph.D.
Foster was the elected prosecuting attorney during Russell Berger’s criminal trial in 1998.
David Reynolds
Judge David Reynolds was the 1st Division Circuit Judge who issued an order of protection against Daniel Coker in 2011 after Karen Martin, a nurse practitioner at Arkansas Pediatrics in Conway, wrote a letter detailing the minor daughter’s disclosure of sexual abuse by Coker along with the findings of a physical examination that were consistent with the disclosure. Reynolds did not refer Coker for prosecution at that time.
Reynolds presided over Russell Berger’s criminal trial in 1998. He is now the judge of the Faulkner and Van Buren County District Courts.
Russell Berger
Berger was convicted of raping Daniel Coker’s nephew in 1998. After his conviction, Berger petitioned the Supreme Court for an appeal, citing ineffective counsel. In his motion for appeal, Berger stated that hisdefense attorney “failed to present evidence of a history of abuse by the alleged victim’s family members” and failed to thoroughly cross-examine the babysitter who first contacted authorities about the child’s disclosure of abuse. The Supreme Court affirmed Berger’s conviction in 2002.
Berger’s victim [unnamed]
The nephew of Daniel Coker, who was 5 years old when he was raped by Russell Berger in 1998, testified at age 20 during the 2013 custody hearing that his uncle abused him during the same time Russell Berger abused him. The babysitter to whom he first disclosed the abuse said the victim also implicated his uncle in 1998 and that she disclosed that information to state police and DHS. Arkansas State Police said the investigation belonged to Conway Police. Thecase file from the Conway Police Department does not show any mention of Daniel Coker during the investigation.
Kathryn Hudson
The third attorney to represent Mossholder, Hudson asked Foster to place the minor children in therapeutic foster care where the “real truth” could come out without the influence of either parent. Hudson withdrew from the case following Foster’s ruling that gave temporary guardianship of the minor children to Coker’s mother, with whom Coker lived.
Hudson is awaiting a hearing on a motion for injunctive relief filed by attorney ad litem Carol Nokes for allegedly distributing documents that contain personal information about the children. She has filed a motion to dismiss the motion for injunctive relief.
Michael Maggio
Former judge Michael Maggio issued all temporary rulings that could not be appealed in the case until he transferred the case to Foster in January of 2013. During a contempt hearing against Mossholder for interfering with custody and refusing to be evaluated by Paul Deyoub, Ph.D., he sent the children home with Coker and held Mossholder in contempt without hearing any testimony.
Mossholder’s attorney argued that her client withheld visitation only after learning that Coker’s mother, who was ordered to supervise Coker’s visitation, had been leaving Coker alone with the children. She also argued that Deyoub would not see Mossholder without a deposit payment and that he should not evaluate her because he evaluated her as a juvenile. Hudson requested an additional evaluation by Stacy Simpson, a board certified forensic psychiatrist who specializes in child sexual abuse.
Maggio continued the final hearing a day before the trial was to begin because Deyoub’s report was not complete. When Deyoub’s report, which contrasted significantly with Simpson’s, was complete in the summer of 2013, Maggio filed the report “sua sponte” (on his own) in the office of the circuit clerk. The report contained explicit, personal information about Mossholder and her family. Maggio did not file the report under seal, and it was left exposed on the public Court Connect domain until the first day of the final custody hearing in September of 2013.
In January of 2015, Maggio pleaded guilty to a federal bribery charge involving a negligence case in which he accepted money in exchange for a reduced penalty. He surrendered his license in April of 2015, barring him from practicing law in Arkansas.
Amy Brazil
Amy Brazil was Daniel Coker’s attorney before being appointed Faulkner County District Judge. She appeared as judge on Mossholder’s misdemeanor charge but transferred the case after Hudson pointed out that she could not preside over the case due to conflict of interest. Brazil suggested David Hogue be appointed as special judge in the case, and Hudson objected due to Hogue’s role as prosecutor in Mossholder’s felony criminal case involving filing false reports, a case that was ultimately dismissed.
Brazil retired from the bench at the end of her term on December 31, 2014, after losing the election for the 1st Division seat to Judge Michael Murphy.
Joni Clark
Joni Clark was the investigator who interviewed Coker, Mossholder and their minor daughter in January of 2009 regarding sexual abuse allegations against Coker. She told Mossholder that she would be arrested if another report of sexual abuse were filed against Coker with the Department of Human Services (DHS). Three days later, the children’s counselor reported allegations from one of the minor children, and Mossholder was arrested for filing false reports. The charges were later dismissed because the prosecutor was not sure he could prove the reports were false.
David Hogue
David Hogue was the prosecuting attorney in the felony criminal case against Mossholder in 2009 for filing false reports. He said he did not prosecute Mossholder because he was not sure he could prove the reports were false. Brazil suggested Hogue as a special judge for the misdemeanor criminal charge against Mossholder for withholding visitation. Hudson objected, and the case was dismissed at the request of City Attorney Micheal Murphy. Maggio appointed Hogue as attorney ad litem after Chip Leibovich withdrew from the case citing nonpayment of fees. Hudson objected to Hogue’s appointment for the same reason, and Carol Nokes was appointed as attorney ad litem.
Hogue is now the Faulkner County Attorney.
A judge in Faulkner County placed two children in the same home as their father after acknowledging that the father may have sexually abused them, raising questions about circumstances that warrant a criminal prosecution.
A recent ruling in a seven-year custody battle has caused concern from advocates and family members for the safety of the two minor children, who alleged sexual abuse by their father and later retracted the allegations after returning to the father’s home.
The ruling gave permanent custody of the children to their paternal grandmother, who shares a home with their father. It was filed five days after the Log Cabin Democrat questioned 5th Division Circuit Judge H.G. Foster concerning a temporary ruling from 2013 that gave the grandmother temporary guardianship of the children.
In Foster’s ruling at the end of the five-day custody hearing in September of 2013, he said “there are indicators that Dad did these things to these children.”
Foster told the Log Cabin Democrat he could not comment on ongoing litigation, but he said the following at the end of the custody hearing:
“There is also evidence that provides a reasonable possibility that Mom contributed in some manner to the sexual acting out and what has been going on with these two kids.”
In the same ruling, Foster said there was “sufficient evidence for the proposition that the children were and would be in danger of being abused sexually were they placed in custody of Dad.”
The permanent ruling handed down this month stated that all allegations of sexual abuse by the father are “not founded and not proven or shown.”
Each of the roughly 20-25 reports on the father of alleged sexual abuse was returned from DHS as “unsubstantiated.”
In his temporary ruling, Foster said he was “less inclined to punish anyone within the context of this case. There are roles out there, but that is not my role.”
20th District Prosecuting Attorney Cody Hiland said Friday that he has no record of a criminal case against the father being submitted to his office for prosecution.
Because Foster’s 2013 ruling was temporary, it could not be appealed.
The Log Cabin Democrat began following this story in late April of 2015 after Phyllis Harrington, the founder of a nonprofit organization supporting abused children, approached the newspaper in an effort to silence the mother’s former attorney, Kathryn Hudson.
She said Hudson was spreading personal information about the children and saying the father sexually abused them.
Harrington added that the children were living with their father in his mother’s home. He had been accused of sexually abusing his children, but he had not been convicted of any crime.
“We don’t just slam people without knowing if they’re innocent or guilty,” Harrington said.
Carol Nokes, attorney ad litem (representing the children in the custody hearing), filed a motion for injunctive relief against Hudson in March of 2015. According to the motion, it came to Nokes’ attention that Hudson “distributed to at least one person, documents related to the minor children.”
The “one person” was Harrington, who requested the documents in a Nov. 21, 2014, email message to Hudson.
“I was waiting on your email as well about your case…Please let me know how I can help with stopping this horrible crime [against] those precious children,” Harrington’s message read.
The March 2015 motion states that Harrington informed Nokes that Hudson gave her the documents.
Hudson filed a motion to dismiss the motion for injunctive relief on April 1, 2015, saying that the court does not have jurisdiction over her and that she has permission from her former client to discuss the case with anyone. Hudson withdrew from the case as the mother’s attorney following Foster’s temporary ruling in 2013.
In June of 2015, the Log Cabin Democrat obtained a 2,200-page transcript of the September 2013 hearing, which cost the children’s mother more than $8,000. Unless otherwise noted, the following information was gathered from the transcript, documents available through the public Court Connect service and through requests in accordance with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act:
The custody battle between Ardith Mossholder and Daniel Coker began in June of 2008 when Mossholder filed reports with the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS) alleging that her ex-husband had molested his two young children.
The two had joint custody, and Mossholder said she filed the reports after observing sexual behavior from her children. On direction from DHS, she took the children to counseling, where they alleged sexual abuse by their father.
Coker filed a motion for contempt and change of visitation and custody in September of 2008, saying that Mossholder fabricated the accusations and coached the children to make the disclosures. He failed a voice stress test administered by the Faulkner County Sheriff’s Office (FCSO) earlier that month.
Joni Clark, an investigator with the FCSO, interviewed Mossholder, Coker and their minor daughter regarding the allegations Jan. 9, 2009. She told Mossholder that she would be arrested if one more report of sexual abuse were filed.
Mossholder was arrested three days later and charged with filing false reports, a Class C felony, after a counselor reported to DHS that the minor daughter disclosed sexual abuse by her father during a counseling session. Coker then received custody of the children.
David Hogue, the prosecuting attorney, dropped the charges in January of 2010 because he said he was not sure he could prove that the reports were false.
“She wanted me to prosecute him for abuse, and he wanted me to prosecute her for filing false reports,” Hogue said last week. “I couldn’t prove that he abused his kids, and I couldn’t prove the reports were false.”
“He didn’t prosecute her because she didn’t do it,” Deborah Reece, Mossholder’s defense attorney, said Friday. “She made the reports based on what her children told her, and the prosecution, I think correctly, ultimately dropped the charges.”
Former judge Micheal Maggio later appointed Hogue as attorney ad litem in May of 2012, who said he accepted the appointment because he never sided with either party and felt as though he knew enough about the case to advocate objectively for the children.
Hudson objected to his appointment citing conflict of interest, and Nokes was appointed as Attorney ad Litem on May 18, 2012.
Helen Rice-Grinder, Coker’s attorney, argued during the final hearing in September of 2013 that the counselor’s report was a result of Mossholder’s coaching the children to accuse their father of abuse.
Mossholder, who had no contact with the children during the first half of 2009 and only supervised visits between July of 2009 and March of 2011, regained custody of the children in April of 2011 after 1st Division Judge David Reynolds issued an order of protection against Coker in response to a letter from the children’s primary care provider.
The letter was written on April 8, 2011, by Karen Martin, a nurse practitioner at Arkansas Pediatrics in Conway, and described an allegation of molestation that the minor daughter made in the exam room along with results of a physical examination that were consistent with the disclosure.
Martin went on to testify during the September 2013 hearing that she had no doubt that the daughter had been abused and told Foster she had prayed that he would make the right decision.
A later examination at Arkansas Children’s Hospital showed no findings of sexual abuse, and the report was returned as “unsubstantiated.”
Chip Leibovich, who was the attorney ad litem until he withdrew in April of 2011 citing nonpayment of fees, also made reports to DHS, as well as Dawn Doray, Psy. D., and Kelly Hamman, who provided therapy for the children.
Doray, who was court ordered by Maggio to evaluate the children, wrote in a treatment summary dated Aug. 24, 2012, that both minor children disclosed to her instances of sexual abuse by their father.
According to her summary, the minor son said he wanted Doray to “tell his father to stop doing it” and that his father told him to lie to her. The minor daughter said their father spanked the minor son for sharing the incidents with Doray during treatment.
In an affidavit presented in June of 2012 by Kelly Hamman, a mental health professional at The Child Study Center of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), Hamman wrote that the “minor children self-disclosed sexual abuse from their biological father and reported being fearful that their biological father would harm them, their biological mother and step-father.”
Additionally, she wrote that the children would benefit from trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, which could not be initiated if the children continued to be exposed to trauma.
Grinder said these reports were also a result of Mossholder’s coaching the children to make allegations against their father and speaking harshly of Coker in front of the children, though Hudson argued that many of the reports were filed during a year in which Mossholder had no unsupervised contact with the children.
Coker’s nephew testified during the September 2013 hearing that Coker had sexually abused him during the same time he was abused by Russell Berger, who received two life sentences in the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADOC) after being convicted on two counts of rape in 1998.
Ronna Coker, Daniel Coker’s half-sister and the mother of Berger’s victim, said during the trial that her son also made this disclosure to authorities before the 1998 trial, but the family did not believe him.
She said they told the child that he was transferring what Berger did to him onto his uncle.
“[The child] thought the sun and moon rose with Daniel,” Ronna Coker said during her testimony. “He was – he was his uncle. They did everything together. And we – and we just assumed that [the child] thought, well, maybe if, you know, I say this and people won’t be mad at me or – or it’s all going to be OK.”
She said the initial disclosure regarding abuse by Berger and Daniel Coker came when Crystal Ferguson was babysitting her son in August of 1998. Her son told Ferguson that both Berger and Coker had molested him.
Ferguson, the babysitter who reported the victim’s initial disclosure of abuse to authorities, testified in September of 2013 that she and Coker’s nephew, Berger’s victim, both mentioned the abuse by Coker to Arkansas State Police and DHS in 1998.
Ferguson said no one questioned her about Coker after her initial reports or during Berger’s criminal trial. She assumed that because Daniel was a minor at the time, those allegations were being handled elsewhere and that he would get professional help.
However, Rice-Grinder did not believe that to be true.
“So you want this court to believe that there was a full blown criminal trial during which Russell Berger was convicted of molesting little [the child],” Rice-Grinder said. “That nobody — prosecutor, state police, nobody getting ready for the case to try to determine credibility of [child’s name] — asked ‘Has he ever made these allegations about anybody else?’”
The Log Cabin Democrat reviewed the files from Berger’s trial and found that Ferguson’s written statement to police did not mention Daniel Coker.
Portions of the transcript from the testimony of Ferguson and Coker’s nephew during Berger’s trial showed that neither of them were asked during direct or cross-examination if anyone else was involved in the abuse.
Citing hearsay, Berger’s defense attorney objected to Ferguson’s testimony about what the child said when he disclosed the abuse to her. Reynolds, who presided over Berger’s criminal trial, sustained the objection.
Berger filed a motion in 2001 for post-conviction relief based in part on ineffective counsel. One of 34 counts that he alleged was that his defense attorney “did not present evidence of sexual abuse by relatives of the alleged victim.”
Foster, who was the elected prosecuting attorney during Berger’s trial and when Berger motioned for post-conviction relief, responded to Berger’s point of ineffective counsel in April of 2001 with “defendant asserts no actions by his attorney which result in effective assistance of counsel. Furthermore, the facts listed in defendant’s petition are conclusory and should summarily dismiss.”
Berger appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court the same year, but only listed four of the original 34 counts because “everything else [was] already recorded elsewhere on record.” The Supreme Court granted a remand on the four counts, which did not include his claim of ineffective counsel.
The Arkansas Supreme Court later affirmed Berger’s conviction.
The Log Cabin Democrat requested an interview with Berger through the Department of Correction but has not been able to visit to date.
Coker’s nephew told his therapist in March of 2010 about the alleged abuse by his uncle after he said he heard Coker’s minor son disclose sexual abuse. His therapist filed a DHS report immediately following the allegation, which was returned as “unsubstantiated.”
Mossholder was arrested again in October of 2011 for interfering with custody, a Class C misdemeanor, after Maggio amended Reynolds’ order of protection against Coker, giving him visitation supervised by his mother.
Mossholder said during the September 2013 trial that she believed his mother was leaving him alone with the children and refused to allow them to return to his home.
During a June 2012 hearing on a motion filed by Nokes against Mossholder for withholding visitation and failing to comply with Maggio’s order to undergo a psychological evaluation by Paul Deyoub, Ph.D., Maggio returned custody of the children to Coker.
Amy Brazil, who was Coker’s attorney until she was appointed to the Faulkner County District Court, appeared as judge for Mossholder’s misdemeanor charge in November of 2011 but transferred the case at Hudson’s request.
She suggested that Hogue be appointed as special judge. Hudson objected, and the case was dismissed in June of 2012 at the request of City Attorney Michael Murphy.
She also objected to having Deyoub conduct the evaluation on the basis of conflict of interest. Hudson said Deyoub evaluated Mossholder when she was 12 years old after she alleged that her uncle had molested her.
She requested a second evaluation by Stacy Simpson, a board certified forensic psychiatrist at Arkansas State Hospital in Little Rock who specializes in child sexual abuse.
The final hearing was scheduled for September of 2012, but Maggio cancelled it three days before the trial date on motion from Nokes because Deyoub’s report was not complete. Hudson requested the hearing not be continued because Simpson’s report was complete and expert witnesses were prepared to testify, but Maggio did not respond to the motion.
When Deyoub’s report was complete in the summer of 2013, Maggio filed it on his own and not under seal with the Faulkner County Circuit Clerk. The report contrasted significantly with Simpson’s report and contained personal information about Mossholder’s family history.
Hudson filed a motion on Sept. 19, 2012, for Maggio to recuse after learning that he had filed Deyoub’s report, but he denied the motion. It was the only motion from Hudson to which Maggio responded.
The hearing was transferred to Judge H.G. Foster in January of 2013 and rescheduled for September of 2013. Deyoub testified during the final hearing that Coker’s tests were largely normal, but that he found him to be “a little bit immature.”
“In other words, he showed no significant stress as a parent on any of these tests. He did not show that he has any kind of anger tendencies toward these children, high levels of frustration,” Deyoub said. “If anything, he’s a more laid back Type B type of personality, not a hard driven disciplinary and task master — anything but that.”
He said Mossholder had borderline personality disorder and cyclothymic disorder, and that her ability to manipulate people would make her “highly effective” at manipulating the children.
“Her history is sprinkled with the most bizarre tales, some of which may have been true. Some of which are manufactured and in her mind,” he said.
Simpson did not testify during the hearing, but her evaluation of Mossholder dated Aug. 31, 2012, read that Mossholder “did not experience a substantial disorder of thought, mood, orientation, perception or memory that grossly impaired her judgment or behavior.”
It also read that Mossholder’s recounting of events was consistent with details and timelines documented in records.
“The stress and frustrations she experienced as a result [of concern for her children’s safety] attribute her persistence in reporting the alleged abuse and pursuing investigations and evaluations not to malicious intent or to secondary gain but to concern regarding the safety of her children,” Simpson wrote.
Deyoub testified that the daughter indicated that her father never did anything sexual to her and that her mother told her to make the allegations.
Simpson’s report showed that the daughter’s disclosures of sexual abuse were spontaneous, detailed, in her own language and from her own point of view as well as consistent over time and situations. It also showed that her anxiety, mood symptoms and behaviors were consistent with a history of abuse.
During closing arguments of the September 2013 hearing, Hudson asked Foster to place the children in therapeutic foster care where “the real truth could come out” without the influence of either parent.
Hudson said she did not rely on Mossholder for information regarding the alleged abuse by Coker, but looked to the expert medical professionals who found the children’s disclosures to be consistent and credible.
In Rice-Grinder’s closing remarks, she said none of the allegations against Coker were found to be true and that Mossholder was not credible. She said each report that came from a mandatory reporter originated with Mossholder, and that any sexual acting out from the children was a result of the attention they got from her when they exhibited those behaviors.
Nokes argued during her closing remarks that “therapeutic foster care” sounded like an institution and that she was not sure how the children would qualify for it or who would pay for it. She said the options were that DHS, after several reports, botched the investigations or the children found that they were rewarded when they mimicked behaviors they saw or heard in the home of their mother, who worked as a “pole dancer.”
She asked Foster to place the children with Coker’s mother.
Foster took Nokes’ advice and placed the children in temporary custody of their paternal grandmother at the conclusion of the hearing, acknowledging that the children’s father also lived in her home and that there were indicators that he had abused them. He said he based his ruling partly on Deyoub’s testimony, though he did not find it completely credible.
Following this temporary ruling, Coker’s nephew wrote a letter to Foster stating that he felt as though he had been “assaulted all over again” and that he did not understand Foster’s “gross misjudgment.”
The letter pointed out that the abuse by Berger took place in Coker’s mother’s home.
Ronna Coker motioned to intervene as guardian for the children in January of 2014. Foster denied the motion, saying that Coker’s mother had the most reason to be responsible for the welfare of the children.
During a review hearing in February of 2014, Mossholder was sanctioned $3,500 for filing a “frivolous” motion to remove Nokes as attorney ad litem.
Also during review hearing, Foster ruled in Coker’s favor regarding a contempt motion that Hudson filed before she withdrew as Mossholder’s attorney. The motion stated that Coker was in contempt of court when he failed to take the children to see Hamman after Maggio ordered that she be the “gatekeeper” for Christmas visitation with Mossholder.
Lena Hancock, the children’s counselor who was also involved in Mossholder’s juvenile case, testified during the February 2014 hearing that the children were “doing well” with their father though they were pulling out their hair. She said the stress that Mossholder created during visitation could have been the cause.
Mossholder suspended her visitation following the February hearing.
Foster’s most recent ruling this year made the paternal grandmother’s guardianship permanent and found that Mossholder “engaged in conduct that constitutes poisoning the minds of the children, has coached the minor children to make untrue statements, and the allegations of sexual abuse against the father are not credible, not founded and not proven or shown.”
Mossholder now has 90 days from the date the permanent ruling was filed to appeal.
The seven-year debate and others like it have prompted Arkansas Sen. Jon Woods to consider writing legislation that would require a judge in a family law case to refer for prosecution any credible allegations of criminal conduct.
“I’ve had conversations with the Arkansas State Police Crimes Against Children department and several other law enforcement agencies,” Woods said. “I still have to analyze the facts, do my homework and understand everything that happened to see if there’s room for improvement. If there’s an area causing bad people to get a pass, there’s no doubt I’ll write legislation for the next session.”
(Staff writer Jessica Hauser can be reached by email at jessica.hauser@thecabin.net, by phone at 505-1277 or on Twitter @jmthauser. To comment on this and other stories in the Log Cabin, log on to thecabin.net. Send us your news at thecabin.net/submit.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)