8.9.09

One woman's struggle to escape abuse (and still has not achieved safety)

Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Mothers Global Justice Alliance.

Permalink

    By Megan TwoheyTribune reporter

    November 11, 2008

      • Regan Martin fixed her gaze on the video camera and took a deep breath.

        She sat outside a strip mall in Matteson. Trucks sped by on the highway, as shop workers on break took drags from cigarettes.

        Martin wished she was in the comfort of her living room. But six days earlier, on May 23, she had fled her Crete home.

        Her ex-husband, John Samolis, 32, was released from prison that day after serving 19 months for brutally assaulting her. Now that he was out, Martin feared he would kill her.

        She had been trying to escape him for two years. But, like so many women before her, Martin found that there is no witness protection program for victims of domestic violence. Disappearing is lonely, expensive and almost impossible.

        She had tried to move out of state with their children, only to learn that abusers—even convicted felons—rarely lose visitation rights. If she left Illinois without permission, Martin would be considered a child abductor.

        She changed her Social Security number, but that often carries a host of problems, too.

        Increasingly desperate, Martin, 33, agreed when a victims' advocate suggested she make a video to serve as testimony if Samolis did take her life. That's what led her to the noisy, wind-blown parking lot of the mall.

        The record button clicked, and Martin started to talk. Her story was long, complicated. As she recounted her harrowing experiences with Samolis, her face reddened with frustration.

        "If they can't find me," she said, looking directly at the camera, "I guarantee it's because John has come after me."

        ♦ ♦ ♦

        On Memorial Day weekend, 2006, Martin lay in bed at St. James Hospital in Chicago Heights. Bruises covered most of her body. Her wrists were bloody, her lower lip split and swollen.

        Nurses had given her morphine and tended to her wounds. Now, a police officer hovered over her bed.

        He wanted her to sign a complaint that would allow Will County to prosecute her husband for criminal sexual assault, aggravated domestic battery and unlawful restraint. Wincing in pain, Martin reached out her hand.

        Seven years had passed since she met Samolis on the dance floor of a bar in Chicago Heights.

        The night ended with him writing his name and phone number on one half of a dollar bill, her name on the other. He ripped the bill down the middle, slapped his half on Martin's hand and stuffed the part with her name in his pocket.

        Six months later the two were married, the ripped bill taped back together and tucked behind a framed photo on the wall of their Steger home.

        Though Samolis denies it, Martin said the abuse started while they were dating. After each blow or shove, she convinced herself that he was telling the truth when he promised never to do it again.

        Then a 24-year-old college dropout, she was eager to provide her young daughter from a previous marriage, Deaven, with a family environment.

        "I was ready to settle down," she said. "I wanted to make it work."

        It wasn't until 2006—following the births of their sons, Johnny and Chase—that Martin started to assert herself. After years of being a stay-at-home mother, she enrolled in massage therapy school over Samolis' objections. The taste of independence emboldened her.

        In May of that year, she gave him an ultimatum. Regan recalled telling Samolis that he had seven days to prove he could refrain from emotionally or physically abusing her and the boys. She wanted him to look into medication for his mood swings. Finally, she said, he would have to prove that he could control his need for sex, which was sometimes multiple times a day. If he did not comply, she would divorce him.

        On the sixth night of the trial period, they returned home from a friend's wedding, where both drank heavily. Samolis began pressuring her to have sex.

        "Chill out," Martin snapped at him, according a police report. She had made herself clear: No sexual relations until he got help controlling his anger.

        "If you don't give it to me, I'll take it," Samolis replied, according to the report.

        He threw Martin onto the bed and ripped off her underwear, the report stated: "She told him to stop, that it was rape. He stated that he was her husband and that he could do whatever he wants."

        Binding her wrists behind her back with handcuffs from a bag of sex toys, he then beat and raped her, she told police.

        When she later fled the house, it felt like a narrow escape.

        "I could tell he was going to kill me," Martin recalled. "I could see it in his eyes."

        Hours later in the hospital, that look in his eyes remained vivid. She put her pen to the police complaint.

        Less than two months later, though, Martin made one of the most common mistakes a victim of domestic violence can make: She took Samolis back, dropped an order of protection against him and told the Will County state's attorney's office that she would not testify about the assault.

        "It was devastating to see her take him back," said her sister, Rachel Martin, who lived next to their Monee home at the time. "He kept attacking her, but she wouldn't leave."

        Soon after, Deaven's father—Regan's ex-husband—called with stunning news. He told her he had obtained an order of protection that would prohibit her and Samolis from having contact with Deaven.

        He said he couldn't have her exposed to Samolis. The girl would live with him in Indiana as long as the order of protection was in effect.

        Martin's hands shook as she hung up the phone.

        She had to give up Deaven for two months.

        The order of protection eventually was dismissed, but the experience convinced Martin that she had to escape from Samolis once and for all. "I realized I had put my children in the position of possibly being taken away," she said.

        She kicked Samolis out of the house and kept reporting his harassment of her to police until he was arrested and jailed in October 2006. The court granted her a new order of protection. She told prosecutors she would, in fact, testify about the attack.

        By the time Samolis pleaded guilty to aggravated domestic battery a couple of months later, Martin was preparing to flee.

        The clock was ticking. He could be out of prison in 19 months. She expected that Samolis would challenge her efforts to remove their two boys from the state.

        "Don't ever try and hold my family from me," he wrote her on Feb. 3, 2007, shortly after he entered prison. "I have rights as a father and a husband to see you all."

        On the run

        Wearing dark jeans and a crisply ironed shirt, Martin stepped onto a witness stand in the Will County courthouse in May 2008. A crease lined her forehead. Her lips trembled.

        Samolis sat 20 feet away, in a yellow jumpsuit and shackles. He stared at her from across the cramped room.

        At Martin's urging, the county was prosecuting Samolis for calling and writing to her in violation of the new order of protection.

        But because the prosecutor had allowed the case to drag on for nearly a year, the bail hearing occurred the same day Samolis was scheduled to be released from prison.

        Martin prayed that the bail would be high enough to keep him locked up. She did not want him back on the streets before a judge gave her permission to move out of Illinois with their children.

        She planned to take the kids and stay with her mother out of state before moving to an undisclosed place.

        For now, Martin and the children were staying at her brother's house in Crete, while she struggled through one legal obstacle after another. There was no one place for her to turn, no person who could walk her through all the necessary steps. With every victory, she encountered a new challenge.

        First, she had to divorce Samolis and secure sole custody of their sons. That took more than eight months, she said, and cost nearly $10,000.

        With the family's main breadwinner behind bars and credit-card debt mounting, Martin didn't make the mortgage payments on their home in Monee. As part of their divorce, the court split the money from the sale of the house, but Martin's share wasn't enough to wipe out her debt.

        She got new Social Security numbers for her and her sons in April of this year under a federal program begun a decade ago to help victims of domestic violence escape their abusers. But without records of their past, many victims have been unable to get housing, land a job, start a new life. Even if they succeed, advances in computer technology have made it easier for abusers to track them down.

        Martin hesitated to use the new numbers until the move to her mother's. And who knew when that would be?

        Samolis had not yet responded to Martin's petition to allow her to move their sons out of Illinois. She suspected he would put up a fight, especially if he were released from prison.

        Rising from his seat in the courtroom, Samolis' attorney, Jeff Aprati, walked toward Martin. An imposing man, he began to question her. Slowly at first, then rapidly.

        If she felt so threatened by Samolis, he asked, why did she reunite with him the summer after the attack?

        Aprati's booming voice made the courtroom go still.

        Martin tried to explain that she felt alone and unprotected by the law, but Aprati cut her off. He shook his finger in her face, called her a liar.

        Steven Platek, a Will County prosecutor, tried to object, but seemed tongue-tied.

        "He's not a threat," Aprati said of Samolis, his voice rising. "He's supposed to get out today. . . . He needs to get out there and work."

        In the end, the judge ruled that Samolis would have to come up with $3,500 for bail instead of the $6,000 the prosecution initially sought.

        Back out in the hallway, Platek delivered the news: Within four hours, Samolis would be out of prison.

        Martin broke into tears and sprinted for her car. She sped to her brother's house, leaving the vehicle running as she frantically filled the back seat with boxes of her belongings.

        She had sent Johnny and Chase to stay with her mother earlier in the week under the guise of a vacation. Then she packed Deaven off to the girl's father's family in Indiana.

        Now, she had to find a place to stay, somewhere Samolis couldn't find her.

        She climbed behind the wheel and peeled out of the driveway. "I've got to get out of here."

        Ties that bind

        Two months later, in mid-July, Martin won an unexpected victory.

        Many victims of domestic violence who share children with an abuser are not permitted to leave the state. Judges are unwilling to strip abusers of regular visits with their children, no matter how much the abuser has attacked their mother.

        But Will County Circuit Court Judge Robert Brumund ruled that Martin could move out of Illinois with her sons, saying she had sufficient reason to fear bodily harm at the hands of Samolis if she stayed.

        Martin remained scared even though the state Department of Corrections had placed Samolis on GPS monitoring—he was required to wear an electronic ankle bracelet—as part of his two-year parole. She had quit her job as a massage therapist and was staying with a friend in an undisclosed location to prevent Samolis from finding her.

        "I'm going to grant the removal," Brumund said, explaining the move would "enhance her life and hopefully the lives of the children."

        Sitting in the courtroom, Martin exhaled. Finally, the turning point she had been waiting for. All three of her children were at her mother'splace. Now she could join them and begin planning the next step: disappearing.

        But just as Martin allowed herself to smile, the judge delivered a follow-up condition.

        "Do you have a cell phone number?" he asked.

        "Yes," replied Martin, fear returning to her face.

        The judge said he would modify her order of protection against Samolis to allow him to phone his sons several times a week and occasionally visit them in a supervised setting in Illinois. To make that happen, Martin had to provide Samolis with her new out-of-state address and phone number.

        "Add that right now," he told the courtroom.

        The next day, Martin was getting ready to go out to dinner with a friend when she checked her voice mail.

        It was John. He wanted her to call him back. He wanted to talk about the kids.

        She did, as the court required. They spoke at length about the children's lives during the time he was in prison.

        Then came a second message. And a third. And a fourth. In all, she said Samolis called her nearly 30 times and sent 15 text messages over the next five days.

        He told Martin he had changed, that he wanted her back. If she moved to another state, he said, he would move there, too, after getting off parole.

        "I sure miss u and regret everyday without u. I miss what we have together. Don't be so cold . . . How bout dinner or ?" one text message read.

        She was devastated. Through tears, in a later interview, she said, "I feel like I'm back at square one."

        The circumstances were familiar, but Martin had changed. She didn't take Samolis back. She called the police, and he was locked up again for violating the order of protection by sending the text messages and making phone calls to her.

        He remained in jail until mid-August, when he returned to court to face earlier charges of violating the order. This time, dressed in a blue jail uniform, Samolis pleaded guilty.

        The judge told him to return to jail until his sentencing hearing Nov. 17. He faces up to 6 years in prison.

        But as Martin's family attorney, Dorothy Styx, explained, the sentence would not allow Martin to completely sever contact with Samolis.

        "Whenever John gets out, a judge will grant him the right to see his boys again, and Regan will have to provide him with a phone number and address of where they can be reached," Styx said. "It's a travesty of the system."

        As Martin packed her bags to rejoin her children, she could glimpse a sliver of freedom. But once again she was forced to wonder: Will she ever truly escape?

        Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      • Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Mothers Global Justice Alliance.

        Permalink

        Despite 57 violations of the protection orders, dangerous behavior and deadly threats, Judge James Souk"rewarded" Connolly unsupervised visitation with his sons; he then murdered both children

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Battered Mothers Rights - A Human Rights Issue.

        Permalink

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Battered Mothers Rights - A Human Rights Issue.

        Permalink

        Climbing Out Broken Windows-UNDERSTANDING THE BATTERER IN CUSTODY AND VISITATION DISPUTES

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Battered Mothers Rights - A Human Rights Issue.

        Permalink

        Climbing Out Broken Windows

        UNDERSTANDING THE BATTERER IN CUSTODY AND VISITATION DISPUTES

        by Forever

        If you are involved in a custody battle with your abuser, this article is a must-read.  I have included below only the topics and first paragraph of each, click on the topic to read the entire article.

        UNDERSTANDING THE BATTERER IN CUSTODY AND VISITATION DISPUTES

        by R. Lundy Bancroft c 1998

        A sophisticated understanding of the mind of the abuser, his style as a parent, and of the tactics that he most commonly employs during separation and divorce, are essential to anyone making custody recommendations or working to design visitation plans that are safe for the children and their mother. Contrary to popular belief, children of batterers can be at just as much risk psychologically, sexually, and even physically after the couple splits up as they were when the family was still together. In fact, many children experience the most damaging victimization from the abuser at this point. A genuine batterer can be difficult to distinguish from one who is unfairly accused, and batterers who will be a grave risk to their children during unsupervised visitation can be hard to separate from those who can visit safely. The insights and expertise of those service providers who have extensive experience working directly with abusers needs to be drawn from, and the level of contribution from victims themselves to policy design also needs to be greatly increased. Custody and visitation battles amidst allegations of domestic violence require policies and interveners (judges, mediators, and Guardians Ad Litem) based in the most detailed knowledge, experience, sensitivity, and integrity. The stakes for children are very high.

        This article is drawn largely from the author’s ten years of experience working as a counselor and supervisor in programs for abusive men, involving contact with some 1500 abusers, and hundreds of their victims, over that period. During the first few years of this period I worked almost exclusively with voluntary clients, and during the latter period worked primarily with court-mandated ones. The characteristics of the clients changed remarkably little during that shift. In the late 1980’s, professionals in batterer programs began paying particular attention to the behavior of clients with respect to probate processes, and we began asking victims more questions about the man’s conduct with respect to visitation and custody. Since leaving direct work with batterers, I have served with increasing frequency as a custody evaluator (both as Guardian ad Litem and as Care and Protection Investigator), and have worked closely with child protective services. I also have drawn from numerous published studies, several of which are listed in the back of this article. [I have chosen for reasons of ease to refer to the abuser as "he" and the victim as "she," but I am aware that there is a small percentage of cases of domestic violence to which this language does not apply.]

        PROFILE OF THE BATTERER (view article)

        Generalizations about batterers have to be made with caution. Batterers come from all socioeconomic backgrounds and levels of education. They have the full range of personality types, from mild and mousy to loud and aggressive. They are difficult to profile psychologically; they frequently fare well in psychological testing, often better than their victims do. People outside of a batterer’s immediate family do not generally perceive him as an abusive person, or even as an especially angry one. They are as likely to be very popular as they are to be “losers,” and they may be visible in their communities for their  rofessional success and for their civic involvement. Most friends, family, and associates in a batterer’s life find it jarring when they hear what he has done, and may deny that he is capable of those acts.The partner and children of a batterer will, however, experience generalizable characteristics, though he may conceal these aspects of his attitude and behavior when other people are present:

        BATTERERS’ STYLE IN MEDIATION OR CUSTODY EVALUATION (view article)

        Batterers naturally strive to turn mediation and GAL processes to their advantage, through the use of various tactics. Perhaps the most common is to adopt the role of a hurt, sensitive man who doesn’t understand how things got so bad and just wants to work it all out “for the good of the children.” He may cry in front of the mediator or GAL and use language that demonstrates considerable insight into his own feelings. He is likely to be skilled at explaining how other people have turned the victim against him, and how she is denying him access to the children as a form of revenge, “even though she knows full well that I would never do anything to hurt them.” He commonly accuses her of having mental health problems, and may state that her family and friends agree with him. The two most common negative characterizations he will use are that she is hysterical and that she is promiscuous. The abuser tends to be comfortable lying, having years of practice, and so can sound believable when making baseless statements. The abuser benefits to the detriment of his children if the court representative fails to look closely at the evidence – or ignores it – because of his charm. He also benefits when professionals believe that they can “just tell” who is lying and who is telling the truth, and so fail to adequately investigate. Because of the effects of trauma, the victim of battering will often seem hostile, disjointed, and agitated, while the abuser appears friendly, articulate, and calm. Evaluators are thus tempted to conclude that the victim is the source of the problems in the relationship.

        WHY CHILD ABUSE MAY BE REPORTED AT SEPARATION/DIVORCE FOR THE FIRST TIME (view article)

        Allegations of child abuse that arise during custody and visitation conflicts are treated with similar skepticism by court personnel and service providers. A large-scale national study found that the rate of false child sexual abuse allegations does not increase at this time, contrary to popular belief (Thoennes and Tjaden). As with domestic violence allegations, there is no substitute for careful and unbiased examination of the evidence. Batterers who do abuse their children can be convincing at portraying themselves as victims of a deliberate strategy on the part of the victim in order to derail proper investigating. There are two salient reasons why child abuse reports may first arise at separation or divorce. First, children may disclose abuse at this time that is longstanding. The awareness of the custody battle can make the children afraid of being placed in the abuser’s custody, or of being forced to spend increased time with him without the protective presence of the other parent. This fear can lead children to make the frightening leap involved in discussing the abuse. After separation, children may begin spending extended unsupervised time with the abuser for the first time ever, so that the abuse escalates or they fear that it will. Increased visitation may cause panic in a victim of child abuse; a case of mine illustrated this point, with a child disclosing a detailed history of sexual abuse immediately after her visitation with her father was increased from one night every other weekend to two. Finally, children are known to be more likely to disclose abuse in the midst of any disruption or major change in their lives. (See MacFarlane et. al. on the above points.)

        THE CONNECTION BETWEEN BATTERING AND CHILD ABUSE (view article)

        Batterers are several times as likely as non-batterers to abuse children, and this risk appears to increase rather than decrease when the couple separates. Multiple studies have shown that 50% to 70% of men who use violence against their intimate partners are physically abusive to their children as well. A batterer is seven times more likely than a non-batterer to frequently beat his children (Straus). A batterer is at least four times more likely than a non-batterer to be an incest perpetrator. (Herman 1991, McCLoskey et. al.) Psychological abuse to the children is almost always present where there is domestic violence; in fact, the abuse towards their primary caretaker is itself a form of emotional abuse of the children, as numerous studies now document. It is true that battered women are also more likely to abuse children than non-battered women are, but unlike with batterers, those levels decline rapidly once the relationship separates(Edleson and Schecter).

        JANET JOHNSTON’S TYPOLOGY OF BATTERERS AND THE AFCC RISK ASSESSMENT:THE QUEST FOR SIMPLE SOLUTIONS (view article)

        Efforts are underway nationally to ease the complexity of assessing risk to children from visitation with batterers by placing batterers into distinct types, based largely on the work of Janet Johnston. For example, a risk assessment distributed nationally by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) draws heavily from Johnston’s work. The types Johnston posits are as follows:

        Type A: “Ongoing or Episodic Male Battering”

        Type B: “Female-Initiated Violence”

        Type C: “Male Controlled Interactive Violence”

        Type D: “Separation and Postdivorce Violence”

        Type E: “Psychotic and Paranoid Reactions”

        ASSESSMENT OF RISK TO CHILDREN FROM VISITATION WITH A BATTERER (view article)

        Assessing the safety of children with batterers during unsupervised visitation requires careful examination of all available evidence, with as few preconceptions as possible about the credibility of either party. Even a highly skilled service provider cannot “just tell” that an alleged abuser is telling the truth or is not dangerous, even after several hours of interviews and even with the assistance of psychological testing. These can be important sources of information, but careful assessment of the alleged victim’s version of events, comparison with outside sources (to assess credibility), examination of court records, and confrontation of the alleged abuser to assess his reactions are all essential to an evaluation.

        Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Battered Mothers Rights - A Human Rights Issue.

        Permalink

        “Presidential Alienation Syndrome,” the new “PAS”?

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Family 'Lawless' Court Whores.

        Permalink

         

        Another reason that “PAS” will never be in the DSM

        “Presidential Alienation Syndrome,” the new “PAS”?

        It makes as much sense to ask the American Psychological Association to put “Parental Alienation Syndrome” or Disorder into the next edition of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual (DSM), the mental-health diagnostic “bible,” as it does for supporters of President Obama’s message to school children to petition the APA to put “Presidential Alienation Syndrome” into the DSM.

        1989 – 2009: Family members including parents who are accused of child abuse have successfully counterclaimed “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (widely called “PAS” or Parental Alienation), counterclaiming that children who allege abuse have been coached or brainwashed to so state by, 80-90% of the time, their vengeful mothers. The children then suffer, proponents say, from the disorder of “PAS” which sounds scientific; however, there is no general acceptance in the medical and mental health communities. To add to the confusion inherent in the words “parental alienation,” the theory plays off the very real behavior of plain old alienation wherein one parent tries to set a child against the other, and it helps some families give structure to terrible upsets that happened to them. Mental health scientists call the actual behavior, when it exists, “alienation of affection,” and suggest that when clear evidence of alienating can be produced (in family court, for example) the offending parent should be appropriately sanctioned and without simultaneously punishing the children. Unfortunately, when “PAS” is counter-claimed to allegations of abuse made in good faith by parents seeking to protect their children, the investigations into the child abuse claims too often halt, and perfectly good parents are sanctioned unjustly by having their parental rights severed or interrupted. Families suffer unfairly, often for years.

        September 2009: Many parents want to protect their children from what they consider the emotional abuse of their children being subjected in their schools to hearing a brief message from the current President of the United States, containing, they suspect, objectionable political overtones. Discussion in households has spread to the media and we hear from individuals who feel so strongly that they plan to keep their children home from school that day. The children are hearing the discussions at home, in school and perhaps on television. Some argue with each other. What must they think of the President? In the name of family values, a laudable goal, some could say that the children are being coached to disrespect this President and/or the presidency for years to come. The President, meanwhile, claims his message is innocent, given in good faith to encourage children to do their homework and study hard.

        The purpose of these small paragraphs is not to castigate parents for wanting to protect their children or themselves, but rather to show the parallels between both non-existent “PASes,” and, drawing on the obvious absurdity of making “Presidential Alienation” an official mental health diagnosis, reveal the sham that would result were any similar credibility given to “Parental Alienation Syndrome” or its derivatives.

        Donnalee Sarda MC, LPC, child advocate, Defenders of Children, Phoenix, AZ September 7, 2009

        __._,_.___

        Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Family 'Lawless' Court Whores.

        Permalink

        Clear and present Danger-Amy Leichtenberg speaks for the first time of the Courts ‘Ordered Murder’ of her two sons Jack and Duncan Connolley by their father.

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Battered Mothers Rights - A Human Rights Issue.

        Permalink

        Clear and present Danger-Amy Leichtenberg speaks for the first time of the Courts ‘Ordered Murder’ of her two sons Jack and Duncan Connolley by their father.

        September 8, 2009 — Claudine Dombrowski | Edit
        Susan Murphy Milano Show Wednesday, 9th, 2009 at 3 pm CST time. CALL IN (347) 326-9337

        If you have a question for Amy and are unable to call in please email me at contact@movingoutmovingon.com and it will be read on air Wednesday, September 9, 2009

        Show Time: 4:00 PM EST 3:00 PM CST 1:00 PM PST
        Call-in Number: (347) 326-9337

        Show Link: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/susanmurphymilano

        If you miss the show it will replay automatically right here on this site all you have to do is make sure the volume on your computer is turned on and up.

        Clear and Present Danger

        by Susan Murphy Milano

        Like most of us I am deeply disturbed by the escalating number of parents murdering their own families. This past weekend was no exception as police discovered 9-year-old Duncan Connolly(left) and 7-year-old Jack Connolly(right) were found murdered in rural Putnam County, IL. Their father was found dead not far from where his car was left. According to police sources, the boys’ father had a rope around his neck when he was found.
        The discovery brought to a close anational three-week search for the man and the boys, precipitated byMichael Connolly’s abduction of his sons following a weekend visitation.

        The last time Amy saw her two boys alive, something was not right. Connolly was acting strange when they met at the police station. Amy refused to hand over her boys on March 7th, an officer threatened her if she didn’t give them to their father, she would be arrested according to her lawyer.

        Amy Leichtenberg filed orders of protection against Michael Connolly more than once after his repeated physical and emotional abuse in the later years of their marriage. Amy filed for divorce that year and moved out of their home. In a 2006, a petition for a protective order against her husband was filed, saying that his "controlling and obsessive behavior" included threats to kill himself and others along with a series of bizarre demands he made of her. Within a 15-month period, Connolly violated the orders of protection 57 times.

        In 2007, Amy was awarded full custody of the boys with Connolly given supervised visitation. According to court reports from the family visitation center, Connolly’s behavior was dangerous enough to temporarily cease all visits with the boys. In my experience, when a family visitation center terminates interaction between parent and child, it sends a red flag of danger. Connolly, the ever witty and clever abuser, was able to resume visits when his psychiatrist sent a "sympathy letter" to the judge "if my client is able to spend more time with his sons, Mr. Connolly’s depression and outbursts would lessen."

        The judge responded by setting a series of "behavioral guidelines." This included obtaining employment, housing and continued therapy.
        "(He) tells me if I ever take the boys away he will hunt me and my parents down and cut us open," Amy Leichtenberg, then known asAmy Connolly, stated in the 2006 petition seeking an order of protection. Amy said during their marriage Connolly had tried to isolate her from her family. A common characteristic among abusers.
        Despite the 57 violations of the protection orders, dangerous behavior and deadly threats, McLean County Judge James Souk"rewarded" Connolly unsupervised visitation with his sons.
        Connolly filed numerous motions with the court, basically wearing the judge down. Despite pleas from Amy and her lawyer, which were ignored. This mother’s plea for supervised visitation was dismissed without regard to serious safety concerns.

        There is an automatic presumption that it is in the best interest of a child “regardless of court orders”, prior violence or threats, to maintain visitation with both parents. Victims of domestic violence face a double edged sword. Either expose their children to imminent danger, or defy the court system refusing to allow visitation. Like so many others before her, Amy tried to deal with aviolent relationship in a family court environment.
        In family court the two parties are presumed to be on a level playing field–law abiding individuals who have a disagreement over a private family matter. A core assumption of family law is that family disputes are not criminal disputes. As such, there are few safeguards built into the family court system to protect against the criminal dynamics that dominate family disputes in cases of family violence. In addition, the accusations the victim makes in family court, no matter how serious, carry no more authority than one person’s say so. One of the most serious consequences is that when a family violence victim opens a case in family court against her abuser, the abuser is given equal opportunity to fight back against the victim’s accusations, often because the abusers past is not an issue. Unless, of course, he is brought in from county or state prison sporting an orange jump suit and leg shackles.
        There are lawyers and men’s groups who argue using domestic violence with a broad brush is not a reason to deny fathersvisitation with their children. Accusing mothers of lying or making up stories to keep fathers’ from their children.

        Under the current laws, a parent without custody is entitled "reasonable visitation." There is a high burden of proof as evidenced in this case when a court refuses to take into account dangerous abusers pose to their children.

        Until we place the issue of labeling these cases as a "private matter" or an isolated incident, expect the death toll amongchildren to rise. Expect the courts to continue to ignore clear and present danger signs when a victim of violence seeks a divorce.

        Like most of us I am deeply disturbed by the escalating number of parents murdering their own families. This past weekend was no exception as police discovered 9-year-old Duncan Connolly(left) and 7-year-old Jack Connolly(right) were found murdered in rural Putnam County, IL. Their father was found dead not far from where his car was left. According to police sources, the boys’ father had a rope around his neck when he was found.
        The discovery brought to a close anational three-week search for the man and the boys, precipitated byMichael Connolly’s abduction of his sons following a weekend visitation.

        The last time Amy saw her two boys alive, something was not right. Connolly was acting strange when they met at the police station. Amy refused to hand over her boys on March 7th, an officer threatened her if she didn’t give them to their father, she would be arrested according to her lawyer.

        Amy Leichtenberg filed orders of protection against Michael Connolly more than once after his repeated physical and emotional abuse in the later years of their marriage. Amy filed for divorce that year and moved out of their home. In a 2006, a petition for a protective order against her husband was filed, saying that his "controlling and obsessive behavior" included threats to kill himself and others along with a series of bizarre demands he made of her. Within a 15-month period, Connolly violated the orders of protection 57 times.

        In 2007, Amy was awarded full custody of the boys with Connolly given supervised visitation. According to court reports from the family visitation center, Connolly’s behavior was dangerous enough to temporarily cease all visits with the boys. In my experience, when a family visitation center terminates interaction between parent and child, it sends a red flag of danger. Connolly, the ever witty and clever abuser, was able to resume visits when his psychiatrist sent a "sympathy letter" to the judge "if my client is able to spend more time with his sons, Mr. Connolly’s depression and outbursts would lessen."

        The judge responded by setting a series of "behavioral guidelines." This included obtaining employment, housing and continued therapy.
        "(He) tells me if I ever take the boys away he will hunt me and my parents down and cut us open," Amy Leichtenberg, then known asAmy Connolly, stated in the 2006 petition seeking an order of protection. Amy said during their marriage Connolly had tried to isolate her from her family. A common characteristic among abusers.
        Despite the 57 violations of the protection orders, dangerous behavior and deadly threats, McLean County Judge James Souk"rewarded" Connolly unsupervised visitation with his sons.
        Connolly filed numerous motions with the court, basically wearing the judge down. Despite pleas from Amy and her lawyer, which were ignored. This mother’s plea for supervised visitation was dismissed without regard to serious safety concerns.

        There is an automatic presumption that it is in the best interest of a child “regardless of court orders”, prior violence or threats, to maintain visitation with both parents. Victims of domestic violence face a double edged sword. Either expose their children to imminent danger, or defy the court system refusing to allow visitation. Like so many others before her, Amy tried to deal with aviolent relationship in a family court environment.
        In family court the two parties are presumed to be on a level playing field–law abiding individuals who have a disagreement over a private family matter. A core assumption of family law is that family disputes are not criminal disputes. As such, there are few safeguards built into the family court system to protect against the criminal dynamics that dominate family disputes in cases of family violence. In addition, the accusations the victim makes in family court, no matter how serious, carry no more authority than one person’s say so. One of the most serious consequences is that when a family violence victim opens a case in family court against her abuser, the abuser is given equal opportunity to fight back against the victim’s accusations, often because the abusers past is not an issue. Unless, of course, he is brought in from county or state prison sporting an orange jump suit and leg shackles.
        There are lawyers and men’s groups who argue using domestic violence with a broad brush is not a reason to deny fathersvisitation with their children. Accusing mothers of lying or making up stories to keep fathers’ from their children.

        Under the current laws, a parent without custody is entitled "reasonable visitation." There is a high burden of proof as evidenced in this case when a court refuses to take into account dangerous abusers pose to their children.

        Until we place the issue of labeling these cases as a "private matter" or an isolated incident, expect the death toll amongchildren to rise. Expect the courts to continue to ignore clear and present danger signs when a victim of violence seeks a divorce.

        Technorati Tags:Clear,Danger,Leichtenberg,Courts,Murder,Jack,Duncan,Connolley,father,Susan,Murphy,Milano,CALL,September,Time,Number,Link,computer,Present,exception,Putnam,neck,discovery,Michael,abduction,March,officer,lawyer,orders,protection,marriage,husband,behavior,threats,series,demands,Within,period,times,custody,reports,interaction,parent,abuser,psychiatrist,sympathy,letter,client,depression,guidelines,employment,therapy,Despite,McLean,Judge,James,Souk,plea,presumption,violence,Victims,sword,Either,expose,children,system,relationship,environment,individuals,disagreement,assumption,cases,addition,victim,person,consequences,prison,Under,account,incident,death,Expect,signs,outbursts,violations,pleas,accusations,lawyers,fathers,sons,parents,weekend,three,week,visitation,didn,himself,month,behavioral,abusers,dynamics

        Posted in : Child Abuse, Crime, Families, Juvenile Crime, Murder,, Abuse, Abused Children, Activism, Best interest of children, Best interest of the child, Best interest of the children, California, Call to action, Child Abuse, Child Custody, Child Custody Battle, Children and Domestic Viol, Angry fathers, Battered Mothers Custody Conference, Battered Mothers Custody Conference-Battered Women, Breaking The Silence; Children's Stories, CPS, Child Abuse, Child Custody Issues Battered Women, Child Custody, Child Custody Battle, Domestic Abuse, Do, Child Custody, Child Custody Battle, Domestic Abuse, Domestic Relations, Domestic Violence, Family Court Reform, Family Courts, Family Rights, Human Rights,Husbands who murder wives, Intimate Partner, Child Custody-, Child found,, Children's rights, Corrupt bastards, Crisis in America's Family Courts,Custody Hell, Dead,Apparent,Double,Murder,Suicide,Texas,, Domestic Law, Domestic Violence, Don Hoffman, Dr. David Rodehheffer, Topeka Court Whore, Family Anilhition-the killers are fathers, Family Violence, Fatalities, GOVERNMENT OPPRESSION, Getting screwed by the Family Courts, Getting screwed by the politicians, Hal Richardson wife beater child abuser topeka kansas, Human Rights, Judge, Judge david 'death' Debenham, Jurror 13, Jurror Thirteen, www.EyesForJustice.com,, KS -Outraged जुद्गेस, KS protective parent reform act, Kansas Domestic violence, Kansas NOW Lobbyist, Kansas University, Little hostages, M. Jill Dykes, Maternal Deprivation, Motherhood, Mothers Rights, OUTRAGEOUSE,Over,homicide,victims,attacker,tools,behavior,relations, Parental Alienation=Pepetrators Aligning Stategiaclly, Reform Family Courts, Speak Out, Susan Murphy Milano, Maternal Deprivation, Un-Justice System, Washburn University, agreement, children-need-both-parents, contempt, death, domestic-violence-awareness,, family court corruption, fathers rights-abusers rights,fees, guardian, homicide, human trafficking, jill dykes court appointed child abuser, judicial corruption, legal kidnapping, logic,murder murder domestic violence fatalaties, orders, parent, parental alienation =perps aligning strategically, psychiatrist,theraputic jurisprudence, whores of the court, whores of the court, the falling of abusers rights,. Leave a Comment »

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] Battered Mothers Rights - A Human Rights Issue.

        Permalink

        “Moving Beyond Murder" Exclusive Interview with Amy Leichtenberg Susan Murphy Milano Show Wed. 3:00 PM CST Call-in Number: (347) 326-9337

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] A Human Rights Issue-Custodial Justice.

        Permalink

        Moving Beyond Murder" Exclusive Interview with Amy Leichtenberg

        The last time Amy Leichtenberg saw her two boys alive, something was not right. The father of the children was acting strange when they met at the police station. Amy refused to hand over herboys on March 7th, 2009 an officerthreatened her if she didn't give them to their father, she would be arrested according to her lawyer.

        That moment will be forever etched in the mind of Amy Leichtenberg, her children found dead at the hands of their father 3 weeks later.

        Although the wounds will never heal, the loss can never bereplaced, Amy Leichtenberg is on a mission to change a civil and criminal legal system whom allows dangerous parents to have access to their children. Where poorly trained "persons" are making decisons in family court across the country without taking into account the dangers associated with mental heath evaluators, appointed lawyers for the children (G.A.L.) judges and law enforcement turning their heads to this rising epidemic.

        There are no adequate words to convey the courage and strength Amy Leichtenberg has shown in just a few short months. She will be our guest for the entire hour in an exclusive interview this week on the Susan Murphy Milano Show where we will also take live calls.

        If you have a question for Amy and are unable to call in please email me at contact@movingoutmovingon.com and it will be read on air Wednesday, September 9, 2009

        Show Time: 4:00 PM EST 3:00 PM CST 1:00 PM PST
        Call-in Number: (347) 326-9337

        Show Link: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/susanmurphymilano

        If you miss the show it will replay automatically right here on this site all you have to do is make sure the volume on your computer is turned on and up.

        POSTED BY SUSAN MURPHY MILANO'S JOURNAL AT 00:01 0 COMMENTS LINKS TO THIS POST

        LABELS: AMY LEICHTENBERG, ARMY LT. HOLLEY WIMUNC MURDER, CHILD CUSTODY, CHILDREN OF DIVORCE, JACK AND DUNCON CONNOLLY

        Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

        Note: Cross posted from [wp angelfury] A Human Rights Issue-Custodial Justice.

        Permalink