Topeka Kansas Courts Have Continued Abuse Of Claudine Dombrowski and her Daughter Rikki Dombrowski

This is an truly incredible story that should never have happened in America. 

Parts of the Kansas Judicial system should be disciplined for how it has victimized Ms. Dombrowski, who was an abused mom.

• KS Appellate -- KS Supreme Court Briefs in reference to the Documented Violence of Hal Richardson and the Kansas Courts.

======

Testimony by Claudine Dombrowski at the hearing of the Kansas Joint Committee on Children's Issues on Nov 30, 2009 in Topeka

       

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Rest of article from the Kansas Watch Dog here:
http://kansas.watchdog.org/2010/compelling-stories-about-problems-with-placement-and-removal-of-children/

 

=====

Dombrowski v. United States, #66407 – Petitioner

INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Entire Petition here: http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org/pages/308

 

=====

Shawnee County Case Docket.

http://www.shawneecourt.org/doe/search.jsp?caseNumber=96d217&first=&middle=&last=&mob=&yob=&location=internet

 

=======

10^th Federal Court District 

(This will be re filed and updated to 2011)

Dombrowski v. Richardson et al

Filed: May 11, 2009 as 2:2009cv02250

Plaintiff: Claudine Dombrowski

Defendants: Hal Richardson and Shawnee County District Court

Presiding Judge: District Judge John W. Lungstrum

Referring Judge: Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse

Cause Of Action: Diversity-Personal Injury

Court: Tenth Circuit > Kansas > District Court

Type: Civil Rights > Plaintiff

Plaintiff:	Claudine Dombrowski
Defendants:	Hal Richardson and Shawnee County District Court
Case Number:	2:2009cv02250
Filed:	May 11, 2009
Court:	Kansas District Court
Office:	Kansas City Office
County:	Shawnee
Presiding Judge:	District Judge John W. Lungstrum
Referring Judge:	Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights - Other Civil Rights
Cause:	28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Jurisdiction:	Diversity
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

=======

Claudine Dombrowski: An abused mom victimized again by the Kansas Courts

Posted in Children, Kansas Government by kansaswatchdog on December 4th, 2009

Claudine Dombrowski: An abused mom victimized again by the Kansas Courts

• Read details in written statement.

•  

This is an truly incredible story that should never have happened in America.

Parts of the Kansas Judicial system should be disciplined for how it has victimized Ms. Dombrowski, who was an abused mom.

Instead of quotes from the audio, please consult these pages that document Dombrowski’s long and difficult battle to protect her daughter:

• Claudine Dombrowski Photos of Abuse

As you view these photos keep in mind that the court awarded FULL CUSTODY of their daughter to the “man” who did this to Claudine.

• Courts Have Continued Abuse of Manhattan Women, Manhattan Free Press, July 12, 2001.

• Manhattan resident fights custody battle for daughter, Kansas State Collegian, July 26, 2001.

 

State Rep Bill Otto: “No crime? You haven’t been guilty of anything? This is a court order that says you can’t go to any school functions?”

“I was under court order till 2004 to not even call the police after I was being beaten because … I was not ‘co-parenting’”

Dombrowski: “These friends of the court make recommendations to the judge. The parents … don’t have a right to see these documents. They do this behind closed doors.”

Otto: (To Secretary Jordan): “You have no rights as a parent …?”

Secretary Don Jordan: “This would be something extreme … I’m not familiar with the situation.”

Otto: “Can a judge do that? … Is that legal… ?”

Jordan: “Under the right circumstances … I hesitate to speculate.”

Sen. Roger Reitz: “This is something that only … the judicial system can really answer … It would be helpful … to have someone … representing the judicial system … to give us some ideas how this could happen.”

Dombrowski: “When you are a victim of domestic violence, and suddenly there’s a child involved, the typical …. power of control is that ‘I’ll take your children from you’. They will and they can the way the laws are setup.” …

“I was told that I’m not to talk to my daughter about the violence. That’s why I don’t see her. That’s why I see her supervised. He was criminally convicted. “

“When women try to get away from people who hurt them … I heard somebody say it’s really hard to believe you won’t call the police … I tell people not to contact the police, because as soon as you walk into court with a DV (domestic violence) and children, you’re already cutting your throat. You will lose your children. That’s the way it is right now.”

“… on the 16th of this month I’ll probably go to jail for breaking the gag order and talking about [being the victim of] violence as it relates to my case.”

Reitz: “… someone ought to be able to deal with this in a way that would address her problem. It doesn’t seem like we’ve done the right thing with regards to this little niche of the law.”

Dombrowski: “The criminal convictions are completely tossed aside and they don’t have any bearing on the family court … The eight criminal convictions that my ex had before getting custody of my daughter were completely dropped [in family court]“

Chair Kiegerl: “I cannot believe that abuse is totally ignored. I cannot believe you can prohibit a person from speaking about their own case.”

“The one thing [where] … I disagree with you is abuse should always be reported.”

State Rep Peggy Mast (R-Emporia): “Domestic violence is a control issue. Sexual abuse is a control issue. Is there any correlation between domestic violence and sexual abuse? Why is that not something that is considered when we take someone to [family] court that has a history of domestic violence?”

Dombrowski: “Yes. That is something I’ve asked myself for 16 years. … It comes back to the family court that has a veil of immunity. … They don’t fully understand the impact of the violence. What battered women have … if they report the abuse, then they’re failing to protect their child … if they don’t report the abuse, they’re still failing to protect their child. So, both ways, they’re going to lose their children …”

For anybody who abuses their wife … [from] a 1996 presidential task force … there is a 70% increase that those children will be abused and/or sexually abused after there’s been battery with the mother.

Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudea: “In 2004 …. I talked with the homicide department in Sedgwick County…. During that time there had been 21 homicides in Sedgwick County and 18 were due to domestic violence …”

“A lot of women do make those phone calls and unfortunately, sometimes it ends in their death.” …

“I want to apologize to you for being treated like a pedophile … not being able to go to a music concert.”

“I commend you for what you’re doing.”

Dombrowski: “I have not talked to my daughter in 10 years [except] for the confines of supervised visits. I’m not allowed to talk to her about anything. All she knows is what her dad has told her.”

• See this video:  Abused Mom Wants Unsupervised Visits with Daughter

  Listen to Claudine Dombrowski:

Podcast Powered By Podbean

 

 

COURTS CONTINUE ABUSE OF BATTERED MOTHER

http://www.kansas.net/~freepress/7-12-01-8.html

By Jon A. Brake

Manhattan Free Press

MANHATTAN, KS - To some this could be considered beautiful. Solid mahogany is beautiful when given a high finish and it does have a high finish. It is about four to four and a half feet long, a foot and a half high; with shinny brass handles at the foot and head. A child's coffin, in this home has been turned into a coffee table.

To Claudine Dombrowski it is not beautiful, that is her daughter, six-year-old Rikki on the couch behind the threatening coffee table. If a coffin coffee table is not enough, a hunting rifle hangs on the wall above the couch.

Claudine, a Manhattan resident, was divorced from Hal Richardson in Shawnee County District Count in 1997. She had been a repeat victim of Domestic Violence and a repeat victim of the State Court System.

What does the Court System think of the coffin coffee table? In a letter to Shawnee County District Court Division Two Judge Richard D. Anderson, Harry Moore, with the Court Services stated: "When I was at the house, I did not recognize anything which in my experience resembled a child's coffin. After looking at the picture and speaking with Mr. Richardson, I have come to find out that it is indeed a coffin and that it was an antique which he purchased in Mexico several years ago and uses as a coffee or end table of sorts."

What about the rifle? Mr. Moore said, "There is also a secured hunting weapon hanging on Mr. Richardson's wall. The thing which is striking about this specific issue is that it contains a remarkable leap of logic. For instance, I am the owner of a 7.9 mm Mauser rifle which was the standard issue firearm for the German soldier in World War II. This weapon was procured by my father who served in Europe during the war. This weapon also hangs on the wall in  my rec room. Does my ownership and display of this firearm lead one to the conclusion that I am a Nazi?"

The question Mr. Moore failed to answer is: "Is it a leap of logic for an abused woman to see the child's coffin and the rifle as more than furniture? Is there a message to the mother? The Shawnee District Court has missed many messages when it comes to the violence in this case.

When reading Court documents it is clear that attorneys have intentionally muddied the waters. It was a nasty divorce, those things happen. Eight or more attorneys, three different Judges and several Court Service workers have filed motion after motion. In the end a Judge wants to compel a dysfunctional family to be normal. It can't be done.

Halleck (Hal) Richardson and Claudine Dombrowski lived together for several months before they were married on November 22, 1995. Divorce papers were filed four month later. By this time records show Hal Richardson had abused Claudine and he had Domestic Battery and Criminal Damage to property convictions.

Hal had seven other convictions before 1995. The convictions were for Battery, Attempted Battery, Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer, Obstruction of Legal Process, Possession of Marijuana and an Open Container conviction.

Most of the Probation Conditions were never followed up on by court officials. After the Domestic Battery conviction, Hal was ordered to attend an "Alternatives to Battering Program" put on by the Battered Women Task Force in Topeka. A few of the comments made on Hal's report were: "Client rude and disrespectful to female co-facilitator as evidenced by his combative stance, his repeated interruptions, his sexist language and his refusal to accept any responsibility."

Another report stated: "Client very disruptive during group, this was evidenced by the fact that he interrupted the facilitator repeatedly by making rude comments, laughing and telling inappropriate sexist jokes."

And finally: "Called PO (probation officer) and client to tell them that he had graduated as far as I was concerned. He only has 17 sessions, but is causing too much trouble with his mouth. Terminated, with cause. Will not be accepted back."

The divorce proceedings were extended for eighteen months. Throughout the proceedings Claudine's attorneys filed numerous reports claiming violations of the restraining order and requesting an order to sever contact between Hal, Claudine and daughter Rikki.

The first involved an incident that both parties agreed in court happened, they just could not agree what happened. Claudine said she was hit in the head with a crow bar and Hal said it was a piece of wood. What ever he hit her with it took 24 stitches to close the head wounds.

At a hearing on June 17, 1996 Shawnee County District Court Judge Jan W. Leuenberger signed order giving custody of Rikki to Claudine and authorizing her to move to the Great Bend area so that "Ms. Dombrowski could avoid the history of physical and verbal abuse she had suffered from Mr. Richardson."

Hal was given supervised visitation.

As in many divorce cases the Judge on November 5, 1996 appointed Mr. Scott McKenzie, Attorney at Law, to serve as Guardian ad Litem to appear on behalf of Rikki. Mr. McKenzie was very experienced in juvenile court proceedings with more than 1,000 cases but this was only his sixth Guardian ad Litem. Under Mr. McKenzie direction visitation terms were worked out to where Claudine would keep Rikki for three weeks and then Hal would have her for a week.

Before the Divorce Trial started a new Judge took over. Judge James P. Buchele replaced Judge Leuenberger.

It is about this time the Court and Court appointed case workers attitude changed. Judge Buchele saw that fifty people were being called as witnesses for the trial. He placed a limit of five for each side. This can be done but it can cause problems. Court documents state: "These limits made it difficult or impossible for Ms. Dombrowski to bring in all of the witnesses to corroborate here clams." During the trial the Judge would not allow hearsay evidence but the proper witness was not there to testify.

At trial Mr. McKenzie indicated, "after reading the police reports of the violence, and the doctor's reports, he was not able to validate any of the truth of any of the accusations of violence made by Ms. Dombrowski."

When asked about Mr. Richardson's criminal history Mr. McKenzie recalled only a single offense for driving under the influence of alcohol, and was unaware of the misdemeanor convictions including the domestic violence battery against Claudine. He was unaware of a misdemeanor battery for a bar fight and the battery of a law enforcement officer.

Records of the Battered Women's Task Force had never been reviewed by Mr. McKenzie. Even thou Claudine had received support from the facility. In a report to the court Mr. McKenzie had recommended anger management therapy for Claudine but not for Hal.

In Judge Buchele's Orders after the trial he made it clear that he wanted more from this couple than what was possible. Here is what he wrote: "Mutual parental involvement with this child has been made worse by Ms. Dombrowski's unilateral decision to move to Larned, Kansas in May of 1996. The distance between Topeka and Larned makes it virtually impossible for an individual treater to work with the family; for Mr. Richardson to have regular and frequent contact with this child; to establish any reasonable dialogue between the parents toward resolving their conflicts. The move from Topeka to Larned, due to the proximity of the parties, has lessened the physical violence. It has, however, done violence to the relationship of Rikki and her father. If long distance visitation is continued, in the Court's view, will take its toll not only on Rikki but each of the parties. The Court specifically finds that separation of the child from either parent for long periods of time is harmful for a child of about three years of age."

He then went on to require Claudine to move back to the Topeka area.

And then Judge Buchele made a judgment that some Manhattan attorneys say is not legal. Judge Buchele ordered: "Further, respondent (Claudine) is directed to not call law enforcement authorities to investigate the petitioner (Hal) without first consulting with the case manager."

On December 14, 2000 after returning her daughter to her fathers home Claudine alleges that she was battered and raped by Hal. Under order not to call law enforcement authorities and with bleeding that would not stop, she drove to St. Marys, Kansas to get treatment. Claudine knew that if she had gone to a Topeka Hospital they would have called the police.

In St. Marys hospital officials did contact the Pottawatomie Sheriff and a report was made. She was advised that because the alleged event occurred in Shawnee County she would have to file there. Claudine said that because of the battery and rape she picked up Rikki the next day and did not return her. The Shawnee County Sheriff's Department was called and took Rikki back to Topeka. The court gave Hal custody and orders for her to attend Topeka schools.

As it stands now, Rikki is with her father in Topeka. Claudine gets two one-hour visits per week. The child will go to school in Topeka unless a new motion, which will be filed this week, is granted. The motion will request that Claudine be given custody and Rikki be allowed to attend school in Manhattan.

This case has received national attention by the National Organization for Women; the Judicial Initiative Commission Hearing by the Citizens for Good Judges and it was told to the Kansas Justice Commission in 1997.

A new Judge will be hearing the motion. Judge Richard D. Anderson took over the case on the retirement of Judge Buchele. But, unless Claudine receiveds help from Kansas citizens, the abuse will continue. In July of 2000 Judge Anderson reaffirmed all of Judge Buchele's previous orders. Evan the order to not call law enforcement authorities

Webmaster Note:  You can contact Judge Richard D. Anderson at (785) 233-8200 ext. 4350

=====

Americans For Prosperity and Kansas Judges

http://www.patrioticthunder.com/localissues.html

The lady (Claudine Dombrowski)

in this picture was violently beaten by

Hal Richardson, the father of her baby and ex-husband.  Now Hal Richardson isn't exactly going to win any father awards this year for this, and his criminal record keeps growing (Battery, Attempted Battery, Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer, Obstruction of Legal Process, Possession of Marijuana and violation of Open Container law.)

Shawnee County Judge James P. Buchele refused to permit testimony in this case because his docket was full.  If that wasn't bad enough, Claudine was ordered by this Judge to move back to Shawnee County so Hal Richardson could be closer to her daughter and ordered her not to call the police when dealing with her husband, all calls had to go through her case manager first.  Allegations of death threats, rape and the killing of her daughter were what the Judge was not letting get into testimony.  Outrage, to say the least, read the harrowing account of a lawyers outrage in this matter here.

Okay, enough already, that last story is just wretched.

  First off, ask yourself this question, do judges make bad decisions?  Of course they do, just like anyone who makes a choice does.  To be fair, judges make all kinds of decisions everyday that can effect you and I detrimentally as the reason your seeing the Judge.  The problem isn't the Judges, it really lies with the criminal justice system in itself.  Is it a perfect system, of course not, not everyone is going to agree on the outcome.  However, the Judges need to police each other.  Now we know, there is a state agency for that, but seriously, how many District Judges have been removed in Kansas from the Bench?  One, and it was so long ago Kansas records can't even remember what he was removed for.  Now if a Judge does make a bad decision as clearly stated in the cases above, should he/she be able to correct that decision, or are they to high and mighty to correct their injustice after they have had some time to reflect?  Some would say that's what the court of appeals are for, but why, come on, why does it have to even go to something like that? 

Common sense says if you rape a little girl or beat the hell out of your wife you shall get punished for that in a severe matter.  However, the law states otherwise, and the list of outrage goes on.

More Here

 

legal briefs here: KS Appellate -- KS Supreme Court Briefs

Mothers of Lost Children Rally at the Whitehouse February 13th, 14th, 2011 - SAVE THE DATES

SAVE THE DATES

Sunday February 13, 2011

Mothers of Lost Children will hold a vigil at the

White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW,

Washington DC from 2:00 to 4:00 pm.

 

Monday February 14, 2011

We will hold a press conference and rally at the

U. S. Department of Health and Human

Services, 200 Independence Ave SW from

11:00 am to noon, then march to the U.S.

Senate to ask again for Congressional Hearings.

 

More information: cppa001@aol.com

 

American Mothers Political Party

SAVE THE DATES

Sunday February 13, 2011

Mothers of Lost Children will hold a vigil at the

White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW,

Washington DC from 2:00 to 4:00 pm.

 

Monday February 14, 2011

We will hold a press conference and rally at the

U. S. Department of Health and Human

Services, 200 Independence Ave SW from

11:00 am to noon, then march to the U.S.

Senate to ask again for Congressional Hearings.

 

More information: cppa001@aol.com

 

American Mothers Political Party

American Mothers Political Party stands Behind Kim Damrow-- (MI) Judge M. Richard Knoblock being investigated for jailing mom without ‘cause’ now, AMPP believes JUDGE ‘faked’ his own alleged ‘death threat’ to FBI. AMPP is calling him out this Thursday on BTR

American Mothers Political Party stands Behind Kim Damrow of Michigan

American Mothers Political Party BTR Show: This Thursday February 2, 2011 at 5 PM CST- 6 PM EST Call-in Number: (347) 205-9977

American Mothers Political Party will have special guest Kim Damrow the mother recently sentenced to 12 hours in jail for custodial interference in Michigan. She is also the current wife of a state representative 84th District State Rep. Kurt E. Damrow  for Michigan.  Apparently now M. Richard Knoblock allowed her now to wait until Monday to serve the time as her child was hospitalized (so nice of him!)

• Chief Judge M. Richard Knoblock Forum for 52nd Circuit Court ...
• Huron County Michigan: Contact Us
• More from Google
• BADASS HAS AX TO GRIND WITH BAD AXE MI CHIEF JUDGE M. RICHARD KNOBLOCK

The FBI received a complaint that “someone” (AMPP believes the Judge himself) that went to courthouse for the protest on Thurs or Friday in her support ----that the judge's life was threatened. So now all her supporters are jumping ship...scared that the feds are coming in.

Anyone will to help out with blogging story and/or promoting Thurs show is much appreciated.

“I think that the feds should investigate and I also think that the judge reported it himself. fishy...”

• She files complaint:

• Judge then says he was threatened- after a large protest at courthouse and the complaint filed.(what a crock)

=====

See articles below:

Breaking news: Attorney reports violation of code of conduct

Published: Saturday, January 29, 2011 2:41 PM EST

BAD AXE - On Saturday, the attorney for Kim Damrow told the Tribune there has been information released that violates the code of conduct of professional responsibility imposed upon all judicial officials, attorneys and courthouse personnel.

“It’s not the press that violated the code,” said Nicole Saady, of Grosse Pointe.

Of the information that has been released, Saady said,  she has not verified all of it.

At this time, in the interest of protecting the safety, privacy and personal feelings of the Damrow family, all press inquiries are to go through Saady, she said.

Look to the Huron Daily Tribune as more details become available.

Editor's note: Due to the high number of libelous comments posted under related articles, comments have been disabled on this article.

================

Hanson: Threat made against judge

By Kate Hessling

Tribune Staff Writer

Published: Saturday, January 29, 2011 2:40 PM EST

BAD AXE — Police are investigating an alleged threat made earlier this week against Huron County Circuit Court Judge M. Richard Knoblock.

“We’ve received information of a threat against the judge and we’re looking into it, along with contacting the FBI,” Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson told the Tribune after being asked about the situation Friday.

Hanson stressed the investigation still is in the early stages.

“We don’t know how far along we’ll go with it, and I can’t comment about it other than it involves the formation of this rally,” Hanson said, referring to a rally supporters held for Kim Damrow.

Damrow was sentenced Monday to 12 hours in jail for violating a court order allowing the father of her 4-year-old son visitation. She said she did so in an effort to protect her son, as she said her ex-husband has a violent past and she does not believe he has reformed.

Damrow’s sentencing on Monday was followed by a number of events, specifically a large swelling of support organized on Facebook.

State Rep. Kurt E. Damrow, Kim Damrow’s husband, said he was appalled when learning of the threat.

“I’m appalled at a public figure being threatened — just as appalled as I am at a child being threatened,” he said.

Kurt Damrow said there should be no type of physical threats.

“This is a matter of compassion and love for children,” he said. “It just goes against everything that we’re presenting. ... Any threat of violence of any type like this has no business on either side — either for or against.”

Hanson said given the recent shootings in Arizona, the threat has to be taken seriously.

“We don’t have any choice but to look at it,” he said. “ ... We’re going to take it serious and look into it.”

Editor's note: Due to the high number of libelous comments posted, comments have been disabled on this article.

===========================

Damrow released early

Allowed to be with sick son, but has to report back to jail next week

BAD AXE — Within hours after being booked in the Huron County Jail to serve a 12-hour sentence for contempt of court for not allowing the father of her youngest son visitation, Kim Damrow walked out of the courthouse a free woman —for the time being.

While picketers outside the Huron County Building were glad to see her free, the freedom didn’t come as a result of the court changing its mind: It was because her 4-year-old son was in the hospital.

Damrow, who is married to 84th District State Rep. Kurt E. Damrow, said her son, Boden, was running a very high temperature and Kurt Damrow took him to the hospital about 4 - 4:30 a.m. Friday. Kim Damrow said she could not go to the hospital because she had to be in Bad Axe to check in at the jail at 7 a.m. that morning.

The Damrows said Boden had a 103 degree temperature, was diagnosed with having influenza A, and the child was being held at Scheurer Hospital for observation.

Following a conference with attorneys involved in the case, Huron County Circuit Court Judge M. Richard Knoblock ordered Kim Damrow could leave the jail Saturday to be with her son, though she would have to return to the jail at 9 a.m. Saturday, Feb. 5 to complete the remainder of her sentence.

Kim Damrow was sentenced to spend 12 hours in jail and pay $1,000 in fines/costs during a contempt hearing Monday. The hearing was one of many that have been held in a custody battle for 4-year-old Boden Noworyta, the son of Kim Damrow and Dustin J. Noworyta.

The parents

Noworyta married Kimberly S. (Dufty) Langley Sept. 23, 2005 by a Justice of Peace in Monroe County, according to the complaint of divorce.

Kimberly S. Noworyta filed the complaint for divorce in the family division of the Huron County Circuit Court May 22, 2008. The couple had lived together as husband and wife until on or about May 19, 2008, records state.

Kimberly and Dustin Noworyta had one child during their marriage, Boden J. Noworyta. Kimberly Noworyta had a second son from a previous marriage, and Dustin Noworyta had two daughters from two different relationships.

Since the divorce, Dustin Noworyta has reconciled with the mother of one of the two prior relationships, and he currently lives with her and her daughter. The other mother has full custody of Noworyta’s other daughter.

Following the divorce, Kimberly Noworyta’s prior name, Kimberly S. Dufty, was restored. The divorce order awarded Dufty full custody of Boden, and Dustin Noworyta was allowed supervised parenting time with the child, and that time was to be arranged by Dufty, the plaintiff. Noworyta, the defendant, also was ordered to pay $241 a month in child support.

Dufty lived in the Upper Thumb area with her two sons since the judgment of divorce was order and filed Jan. 1, 2009.

Court records indicate Noworyta had three visits with Boden prior to May 2010, and there was a 15-month period when there were no father-son visits.

May 2010

On May 5, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion in Huron County Circuit Court, alleging Dufty denied him parenting time and it is in the best interest of the child to establish parenting time.

“During the past year, every attempt to spend time with my son has been met with last minute cancellations, refusing to show and not providing an address for me to visit my son,” he states in that motion regarding parenting time. “The last time I have been allowed to see my son was over one year ago.”

Noworyta stated he had been refused phone calls with his son.

“I am trying to stay connected with my son to the best of my abilities being over three hours away, and would at least love to hear his voice between visits,” his motion states.

In her response to Noworyta’s motion, Damrow disputes the claims in his motion, stating she has not disobeyed the parenting order. It also outlined the circumstances of the three visits that took place since the divorce and her willingness to allow Noworyta to see Boden, so long as it’s in a safe place.

“I explained to him that if he wants to see Boden, he would have to come to Huron County and give me ample time to find a safe place to meet,” she said in her response, filed May 13, 2010. “I would not feel comfortable, nor would I feel safe, taking my son out of the county to an area that I am not knowledgeable of and meeting him with my son.”

She asked the court to not issue or establish parenting time because it would not be in the best interest of her son.

“I greatly fear that there is a likelihood of abuse during even supervised visitation, both mentally and physically,” Dufty stated.

Dufty said she tried to discuss adoption with Dustin because he begged one of the mothers of his other daughter’s to put that child up for adoption in the past, and had gone as long as four years without seeing that child, even though the daughter lived just 5 miles away from him.

Secondly, she said Kurt Damrow is the only father figure that Boden has known.

“At some point, I admit, it is my hope that Kurt will be allowed to adopt Boden, as he is a loving and constant man in Boden’s life,” Dufty stated.

Kimberly S. Dufty and Kurt Damrow were married May 22, 2010. Her legal name then changed to Kimberly (Kim) S. Damrow.

June/July 2010

On June 18, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion regarding parenting time and other relief, asking the court to require Kim Damrow to comply with the parenting time provisions in the judgment of divorce and to provide make-up time for her denial of parenting time.

On July 1, Knoblock ruled Noworyta could have supervised parenting for four hours on a select number of Sundays, through and including Aug. 22, 2010. The order stated the parties were to meet at the McDonald’s restaurant in Frankenmuth, and Noworyta then would have parenting time with Boden in the Frankenmuth area. Each party was allowed to bring an observer with them.

The order also required both parents, along with Boden, had to have psychologicals done by a psychologist as agreed to between the parties, at the expense of the plaintiff, Kim Damrow (because she asked the court to order the evaluations).

August 2010

On Aug. 17, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion for contempt and expanded parenting time, alleging Kim Damrow denied him parenting time July 25, 2010. The motion also states Kim Damrow was refusing to tell Boden Noworyta is his father; threatened to cut short or deny visits if Noworyta were to tell Boden he is his son.”

The motion states Kim Damrow repeatedly frustrated Noworyta’s efforts to call Boden, and Noworyta rarely had a normal conversation with Boden without interruption from Kim Damrow.

“ ... It appears (Kim Damrow) is uncontrollable by anyone and will do what she pleases, even if it is in direct violation of the court’s order; (and) that she continues to obstruct any attempt of (Noworyta) to establish a personal relationship with his soon, going even so far as objecting to Boden being told (Noworyta) is his father.”

Noworyta’s motion states unless Kim Damrow’s held in contempt by the court for failing to abide by a stipulated court order, it will continue to be a struggle for Noworyta to have a normal relationship with his son.

The motion also states while appointments for the psychologicals had been scheduled to the satisfaction of both parties, Kim Damrow canceled them without notice to Noworyta or her attorney.

In her Aug. 19, 2010 response to the motion, Kim Damrow explained she had a change in attorneys since the previous hearing, and she was in contact with the individual who was to do the evaluation, and she asked the judge to postpone her evaluation. Also, her response states, the clinic was the one to cancel Noworyta’s appointment because they were unable to reach him by telephone.

As for the claims she denied him parenting time, Kim Damrow explained she was very ill on July 25, 2010 and tried numerous times to reach Noworyta, however, he did not have a phone so she could called the numerous phone numbers he makes calls from. She said she also sent e-mails to his partner and sister-in-law hours before he had to leave Dundee to go to Frankenmuth that day.

“I did tell Dustin that we should bring him back into Boden’s life slowly and that as sensitive as Boden is, let’s try to feel him out the best we can before we explain who (Noworyta) is,” she stated in her response. Her response claims when Noworyta first brought up the subject with Boden, Noworyta grabbed Boden and sat him on his lap very hard, shouting “Do you know who I am? I am your father.” And he broke out in tears, she said.

Regarding the difficulty of having phone conversations, Kim Damrow’s statement notes Boden rarely talks on the phone to anyone because he was 3 years old.

First contempt hearing

During the contempt hearing on Aug. 30, 2010, the accounts of the previous visitations and Noworyta’s mental stability were as different as black and white.

Noworyta’s Bad Axe attorney, Duane Cubitt, said the visitations went fine, and Boden and Noworyta got along fine, according to transcripts from the hearing.

“My time with Boden went great,” Noworyta said. “Kim spent a lot of time in the background trying to make it miserable, but that was about it ...”

Cubitt painted Kim Damrow as being uncooperative, and said his client believes Kim Damrow intentionally did not show up for the July 25 parenting time.

He said she was being difficult as to the visitation’s venue, not allowing Noworyta to take Boden outside of the McDonald’s restaurant to go to a museum or park.

During her testimony, Kim Damrow said Boden was a different child before she divorced Noworyta.

“When Dustin was with us ... all my family, they thought something was wrong with us. He was 21 months (old), he quit smiling, he was sullen, he was sad ... you could tell he was fearful,” she said in the hearing transcripts. “It took a long time to bring him back to where he is today.”

That’s why Kim Damrow said she asked the court that if he wants visitation, it’s his obligation to prove his circumstances have changed. She testified he should be responsible for paying for his own evaluation, then following the psychologist’s orders and get treatment and take parenting classes

During cross examination, Kim Damrow told the court she was going to wait to tell Boden that Noworyta is his father.

“We were going to counseling as soon as possible to deal with it ...,” she said. “I don’t want to mess him up any more than he’s been messed up. I don’t know the answers completely, I’m not claiming to be the best mother, I do my best.”

When asked if she doesn’t think Boden’s entitled to know who his dad is, Kim Damrow said yes — if Noworyta sticks around and gets mentally healthy.

Cubitt argued Noworyta is not unstable and he’s very capable of parenting children.

“So I don’t know where Kim comes up with this idea that somehow or other he’s a violent person and that her child is somehow endangered if he is around Boden without her being present,” Cubitt said.

With regard to her testimony about the child negatively reacting to the previous visitations, Cubitt said, “I mean, what 3-year-old wouldn’t be based on what the mother is putting this kid through. She won’t even acknowledge that Dustin, my client, is the child’s father. And that kind of gives you an insight into what kind of person she really is.”

But Kim Damrow’s stance has been that the safety of her child comes first, and she is doing what she can to protect — not harm — him.

Knoblock ordered the visitations take place for six hours in Huron County on alternate weekends, and the parties meet at the McDonald’s restaurant in Bad Axe. The judge ordered Noworyta’s mother or grandmother be present during all parenting times. He also ordered the psychological evaluations be scheduled and done.

He did not hold Kim Damrow in contempt.

“But if there’s further problems, I won’t hesitate to do that,” Knoblock warned. “But I’m not going to at this time.

November 2010

On Nov. 12, 2010, Kim Damrow entered an emergency motion asking the court to modify it’s Aug. 30, 2010 decision. Among the reasons, was an Oct. 31, 2010 incident where she says Noworyta acted in a violent manner. Also, she said it is not in the best interest of the child to participate in overnight visitation with Noworyta until his psychological records are produced by Huron Behavioral Health for evaluation and the psychological evaluations of are performed.

In Noworyta’s response, which Cubitt filed Nov. 19, 2010, Noworyta denies it is not in the child’s best interest to delay overnight visitation; claims Kim Damrow has had several months to complete the psychologicals; the parenting time has gone well; and the father and son enjoy each other’s company.

“Boden is a normal child when with (Noworyta),” the response reads. “He laughs, plays and is very interactive; Boden is full of life.”

Also on Nov. 19, 2010, Cubitt filed a motion for clarification, asking the court to, among other things, to expand the amount of parenting time to include all time provided for in the Huron County Friend of the Court parenting time guidelines, including extended summer parenting time.

In her answer to that motion, Kim Damrow asked the court deny the request.

December 2010

On Dec. 3, 2010, Knoblock ordered the psychological testing of all the parties be done in Bad Axe, as requested by Kim Damrow, and that there had to be make-up time scheduled because Kim Damrow failed to deliver Boden to the parenting time exchange location in Frankenmuth on Nov. 26.

On Dec. 4, 2010, Noworyta filed a motion asking the court to hold Kim Damrow in contempt because, among other complaints, she did not allow him visitation on Dec. 10, 2010.

Second contempt hearing

During a Dec. 16, 2010 public hearing, the court heard arguments and reviewed a doctor’s note stating Boden had been sick. The note didn’t specifically state he was too sick for visitation, and Kim Damrow was told future doctor notes would have to include that in order to suffice in court.

Knoblock did order to hold Kim Damrow in contempt of court for failing to providing parenting time the court previously ordered. However, he held the punishment in abeyance, pending her further compliance with the court’s parenting time orders.

The court also ordered arrangements be made for psychologicals and set Christmas parenting times.

The assessments

Tammy L. McPherson, licensed professional counselor of Bad Axe, conducted the psychological assessments on Kim Damrow and Noworyta pursuant to the Dec. 16, 2010 order.

According to the assessment, Kim Damrow reported no medical or mental health history.

“She is not prescribed any medications, however, does report high levels of stress, no appetite, difficulty sleeping and chest pains. She believes these symptoms are due to her fear about her son Boden’s safety while in care of (Noworyta),” McPherson’s letter states. “(Kim Damrow) believes her marriage to (Noworyta) to be one of physical and emotional abuse.”

McPherson reported that after further discussion regarding Kim Damrow’s fears, it is apparent (Kim Damrow) is concerned Boden could be emotionally abused by his father.

McPherson’s letter states Noworyta has no medical or legal history.

“He reports receiving mental health services for a short period of time in 2008, through Huron Behavioral Health,” she said, noting he signed a release to give her his records, and also released records from the Department of Human Services in order for the therapist to confirm he does not have an open case with any DHS agency, and no open case in any county was confirmed.

“After reviewing his records from HBH, it is apparent (Noworyta) was struggling with depression and utilizing alcohol as a coping mechanism,” McPherson’s letter reads. “He reports to not continuing the prescribed medication for depression, as he felt it wasn’t needed after he moved back to his hometown and was divorced. He reports being sober for the last three years. He denies any mood swings or depression currently.”

In her recommendations, McPherson said both parties would benefit from counseling (together) to resolve the conflicts that are preventing them from working as a parental team. She said it would be helpful for both parties to learn healthy communication skills and conflict resolution techniques.

January 2011

The defense filed a motion Jan. 18 asking the court to hold Kim Damrow in contempt for failing to allow parenting time previously ordered by the court for Jan. 14.

The motion states Boden enjoyed his Christmas parenting time with his father and step siblings, but did go home a half day early because Boden indicated he missed his mother and wanted to be returned to her. When it was time for the next visitation on Jan. 14, Kim Damrow failed to deliver Boden, the motion states.

Kim Damrow told the Tribune when she picked Boden up from the last visitation Noworyta was acting very suspicious, repeatedly stating she couldn’t call the cops. When she met him to pick up Boden, she said the child was screaming and crying, clinging to her and he would not look at Noworyta. She said Noworyta “just kept apologizing.”

She said she was concerned and took Boden to his pediatrician, Dr. Kala Reddy, to get a physical Jan. 3. According to a report submitted to the court from that doctor’s visit, it was stated that Boden was complaining of neck pain, had not eaten very well and had a temperature of 101. It also was noted Boden was fearful in the car, refusing to go to even a friend’s/relative’s house.

Reddy recommended the mother continue counseling, and she reassured Kim Damrow that she did not see any evidence of trauma to Boden’s neck.

Kim Damrow was able to take Boden back to the pediatrician Jan. 6. The reason for the visit was because the child had not been sleeping, and was in pain in his mouth because he was chewing the insides of his cheeks.

In her observation, Reddy reported Boden “is rather too quiet for his age and looks worried and pretty anxious. ... He does not appear to be acutely physically ill, though.”

After a detailed physical, Reddy diagnosed the child’s condition as acute separation anxiety. In a Jan. 14 letter, she states she does not recommend he be removed from his mother at this time without the advice of a psychiatrist or child psychologist.

Both the defense and the court were unaware of the doctor’s note.

In the defense’s Jan. 18 motion, Noworyta asks the court to hold Kim Damrow in contempt and punish her accordingly, and require the plaintiff reimburse Noworyta for attorney fees and other costs.

Third contempt hearing

During a four and a half hour contempt hearing Monday, of which the complete transcripts are not yet available, Reddy testified about her dealings with Boden and her letter and written observations were admitted into evidence.

Despite the explanations given, Knoblock held Kim Damrow in contempt, noting “it’s clear to me from all the hearings I’ve had, the testimony that I’ve heard, and including hers and that of other people presented during these hearings, that she does not want (this) father (to) be in the life of the child, she wants to cut him out, that’s what she wants to do,” according to partial transcripts that were available Friday.

Knoblock said he believes Kim Damrow’s actions border on child abuse.

However, in regard to Reddy’s testimony, he said an evaluation needs to be done. He ordered an appointment be made, and that order was fulfilled later that afternoon.

Until the evaluation is complete, the judge ordered the defense hold off on the two phone calls the court awarded him for each week, and ordered future visitation be supervised.

Emergency hearing

Kim Damrow’s attorney argued submitted an emergency motion for stay and appeal Thursday, noting the plaintiff did not have enough time to prepare for a criminal contempt charge, it was believed the charge was civil. The attorney, Nicole Saady, of Grosse Pointe, noted she was hired to represent Damrow on Saturday.

Thus, the court was denying Kim Damrow’s due process rights by not giving her enough time to represent herself.

She also argued that Kim Damrow should be able to purge herself, i.e. correct the offense by providing make-up parenting time.

Knoblock disagreed, stating the motion specifically asked she be punished, which adequately put her on notice that she was being charged with criminal contempt for willfully disobeying a court order.

While he sentenced her to 12 hours in jail, Knoblock said the law provides that for a criminal contempt charge, the defendant could be sentenced up to 93 days in jail and fined up to $7,500.

Both sides respond

Cubitt said in no way is his client a threat to his son. He explained Noworyta left his job to move to Huron County and had problems finding employment, which lead to depression. Matters worsened as the divorce was not amicable, and it wasn’t until Noworyta moved out of the area that he was able to get back on his feet financially and turn his life around. Once he had, he filed a motion for parenting time to spend time with his child, Cubitt said.

But Kim Damrow said he hasn’t changed, and if anything, he’s gotten worse. She voiced frustrations that she is trying to protect her child, but the system is not allowing her to do so.

“I can’t protect my child, and it is the most horrifying feeling for a mother,” Kim Damrow told the Tribune.

On Friday, Kim Damrow vehemently disagreed that she is the cause of Boden’s anguish.

“Some have questioned whether Kurt and I are the ones causing the mental anguish. What a gross injustice of the system to accuse the mother, when the mother has no mental health issues,” Kim Damrow told the Tribune. “But the father’s records from Huron Behavioral Health clearly show that he had depression, that he abused alcohol and he was abusive. Why would she not be concerned for child?” Especially when Dr. Kayla Reddy, Boden’s pediatrician and the only professional to have ever seen Boden throughout this entire thing, Dr. Reddy says after a visit with his father, there was a drastic change in his behavior which she witnessed. And Dr. Reddy had cause to be alarm, and Dr. Reddy asked the court to not remove him from his mother at this time, and that by further removing him from his mother could cause permanent damage — that’s huge.”

Editor's note: Due to the high number of libelous comments posted, comments have been disabled on this article.

Marin County: Audit Unveils Failure of Family Court - Sets Precedence For Needed Audits in Family Courts Nation Wide

Marin Voice: Audit unveils court problems

By Kathleen Russell
Guest op-ed column

Posted: 01/28/2011 01:59:00 AM PST

THE California Bureau of State Audits last week released its 109-page report, detailing the results of its 17-month audit of the Marin and Sacramento Family Courts.

Across the board and on nearly every measured aspect, the Sacramento and Marin family courts failed to meet the minimum standards required by law.

So you may wonder what the latest audit of the Marin family court means, and how the same report described by state Sen. Mark Leno as "quite disturbing" could be hailed by local Marin court officials as "proving beyond any doubt" that "there's no problem."

Simple. The Marin Court has deliberately mischaracterized this audit as comprehensive and boasted that "the report does not contain a single finding of "... judges and mediators putting children at risk."

Interestingly, the Center for Judicial Excellence and our allies drafted an earlier audit request focused on evaluating "increasing evidence that children in custody disputes are being removed from their primary, non-abusive caretakers and placed in the custody of parents who have been identified as the children's physical or sexual abusers."

The Administrative Office of the Courts — the lobbying arm of the California courts — labeled these "very serious allegations" and fought to narrow the scope of the audit, explaining in a May 19, 2009 letter, "these claims cannot be verified or refuted by the data collected in the audit."

The Marin Court has apparently forgotten the California judiciary's stated position on the parameters of a viable audit.

The audit provides a valuable explanation as to why things remain awry in the Marin family court.

Consider some of the findings: The Marin Office of Family Court Services could not demonstrate that five of the seven family court mediators met even the minimum qualifications and training necessary to perform mediations and make custody recommendations. The court does not document and track complaints and potential conflicts of interest and their dispositions.

The Marin mediators' current supervisor is not qualified to perform clinical supervision of family court mediators regarding its individual cases, as required by law.

For all eight sampled complaints filed against mediators, the manager did not document whether he consulted with the mediator during the complaint investigation. In a considerable number of instances, the audit reported "limitations in their ability to determine the number of complaints received," making their data unreliable.

We must wonder whether the mass document destruction by the court and others during an eight-month standoff with the state auditor contributed to the significant gaps in recordkeeping.

The Marin Court could not demonstrate that its private evaluators were qualified and met certain requirements. For three of the five sample cases that the auditor reviewed involving a private custody evaluator, domestic violence training certificates were not attached to completed evaluation reports, as required by California Rules of Court.

Quality control issues dominate the report.

Because of the national impact of our work to protect children in family court, the center was recognized in October by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden at an intimate White House ceremony commemorating Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

We were also honored to coordinate and facilitate the first White House briefing on the national family court crisis last May.

While the Marin Court seems unable or unwilling to accept auditor criticism and instead is attacking the center, we remain steadfast in our nearly five-year commitment to try to work collaboratively with the Marin Court to improve its service to our community's children.

We invite the Marin Superior Court to enlist the Marin County Bar Association and other interested stakeholders in a community forum to discuss how we can collaborate to transform Marin's Family Court into a model of best practices that protects children and makes us all proud.

Kathleen Russell is executive director of the Marin Center for Judicial Excellence.

------------------------

Barry Goldstein12:08 am

This issue should be discussed in the context of current scientific research about domestic violence cases. The research establishes that custody courts are routinely getting domestic violence cases wrong and making decisions that place children in jeopardy. This problem has continued longer than should have been tolerated in part because of the failure of the media to expose the harm to children. Accordingly I particularly appreciate you providing space for the column by Kathleen Russell in order to help educate the public.

As a result of the research, we are in a transition period from the outdated and discredited practices that have led to so many tragedies to the adoption of best practices based on the specialized body of scientific research now available about domestic violence. It is disappointing that the Marin courts initially acted in such a defensive and closed manner.

I hope they will look more closely at the report, the reaction to the report and the new research and take a more constructive approach to reforming the system in order to better protect children. I particularly like Kathleen's suggestion that the court work together with the bar association and other stakeholders to adopt best practices. I would particularly recommend that the domestic violence community be included and be considered the leader in this process.

They are the resource in the community for responding to domestic violence. Sometimes they are mistakenly treated as if they were partisans, but that ignores the fact that the legislature and the courts have laws and policies to prevent domestic violence. We would never consider firefighters partisan because they always oppose arson so there is no reason to consider domestic violence advocates partisan because they support the court's policy against domestic violence. The only difference is that firefighters don't have to face arsonists' rights groups and no one would treat arsonists and firefighters as two sides of a dispute who have to be treated equally.

Family Court Mafia: AMPP Mothers Are Coming For You!

We are mad as hell and we aren't going to take it any more!!

http://AmericanMothersPoliticalParty.org/

AMPP—Back from the 8th Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference 2011.This is the year of the child.

Until Mothers and children’s voices are heard—We will NEVER shut up- We will never Give up—And we will NEVER Go AWAY

Court Whores – Your Days are Numbered!

www.BatteredMothersCustodyConference.org

Children are our future? Then why do judges send them to live with abusers??

SIGN THE PETITION HERE:

http://womensrights.change.org/petitions/view/children_are_our_future_then_why_do_judges_send_them_to_live_with_abusers

Targeting: The President of the United States, The U.S. Senate, The U.S. House of Representatives, see more...

Started by: Kym Payne Lesley

There is a crisis in our nation's family courts.  Judges are awarding child custody to abusers and pedophiles and punishing the safe parent who tries to protect the children from harm.

Have you ever heard the saying "Good Mamas don't get their kids taken away from them?"  I heard it too.  Well... there is a catch... Good Mamas that left really bad men DO IN FACT lose custody of their children... all of the time....  In turn, the statistics will ASTONISH AND OUTRAGE YOU!

The reason why we have all of the petitions against ANY kind of violence is because these perpetrators learned it from somewhere....  today our government, law makers, police force, etc teach young minds that they deserve to be abused until they become the abusers too.  Violence is passable & rewarded in America.

If you know FOUR women, then you know someone who is going to experiece violence at some level in her life... and its your responsibility to sign and get four more people to sign it as well.  If not, the world will stay ignorant and our kids will be trapped as victimizers or victims.

FACTS: Like Father Like Son, Like Mother Like Daughter
1. Witnessing violence between one’s parents or caretakers is the strongest risk factor of transmitting violent behavior from one generation to the next... by becoming the aggressor or the victim who has learned through life... its acceptable.

2.Boys who witness domestic violence are twice as likely to abuse their own partners and children when they become adults.

3. 30% to 60% of perpetrators of intimate partner violence also abuse children in the household.

4. 1.3 million physical assaults are reported by women who are abused by their intimate partner... and to make it worse, msot cases of domestic violence is never even reported.

5.  Studies conducted by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), looking solely at court records, have found documented evidence of domestic violence in 20-55% of contested custody cases.

6. A survey of battered women by the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence found that courts awarded joint or sole custody to the alleged batterers 56-74% of the time (depending on the county).  Many of these cases involved documented child abuse or adult abuse.

7. A study of 300 cases over a 10-year period in which the mother sought to protect the child from sexual abuse, found that 70% resulted in unsupervised visitation or shared custody; in 20% of the cases the mothers completely lost custody, and many of these lost all visitation rights.

8. Abusive fathers are twice as liekly to seek sole custody of children.

9. In 2010, we are close to the 100 DEATHS mark due to the Family Court System awarding sole custody or joint custody to Domestic Violence offenders.

 

PETITION TEXT

Lenient Domestic Violence Laws: Why is our government scared of perpetrators?

If 9 out of 10 men that take mothers to court to obtain sole custody are domestic violence offenders... AND.... 70% of those perpetrators win sole custody... what is to become of our future?

Our children are dying at a rate of 5 a day due to child abuse.  75% are under the age of 4.  That rate almost doubled since 1995... so have the rates of Domestic Violence Offenders who gain sole custody.  This is our fault for not changing our world and saving our babies. 

Women who are "good mothers trying to protect their children" are being removed from their children's lives or getting only supervised visitation. 

Thousands of women are being muted by the Family Court System to not speak of her Domestic Violence experience.  Saying the problem is "embarrassing or shaming the children" by the mothers who speak out... when the problem is the fathers who are unable to show the children a real example of a "man".

Children are learning that violence is rewarded.  So... their problem solving skills are being formed by our government that won't put a concrete boundary around the influence of violent offenders over our children.

You are a political figure with the power to make a change.  Leave a big footprint in the world please, if you won't stand up for our women and children...  they will never be able to stand themselves.

Take a closer look at the statistics.  Then take a close look at stiffer laws and more effective consequences for people who hurt the ones they are supposed to protect. 

Much Love.... I know you can help... and trust that you will.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE:

http://womensrights.change.org/petitions/view/children_are_our_future_then_why_do_judges_send_them_to_live_with_abusers

Rikki Dombrowski: Don’t Give Up – Love, Hope and Empowerment—The Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas)

Your Mother Claudine Dombrowski Loves you and she is here for you when you can finally break free. She has not given up, she will not shut up and she will not go away!

“Granny died and her grand-daughter was not allowed to attend her funeral.”

“This tribute video was made– for three generations lost—destroyed by the Family Courts.”

“Granny, Mom and Rikki three hearts united across the universe and above and beyond the Shawnee County Courthouse MAFIA.”

 

• Rikki Dombrowski– Run Like The Wind http://rightsformothers.com/2010/08/2…
• "DANGEROUS" CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI ATTENDS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RALLY: DOES SHE FACE JUDICIAL RETALIATION AGAIN http://rightsformothers.com/2010/10/2…

Hope Love Power and enlightenment

Rikki, Granny, Mom ,apos;Dont give up apos; Love power ... - Google Video - Motore di ricerca video Truveo - Watch more Videos at Vodpod.

I am a thousand winds that blow,

I am the diamond glints on snow,

I am the sun on ripened grain,

I am the gentle autumn rain.

 

When you awaken in the morning’s hush,

I am the swift uplifting rush

Of quiet birds in circled flight.

I am the soft stars that shine at night.

 

Do not stand at my grave and weep

I am not there; I do not sleep.

Do not stand at my grave and cry,

I am not there; I did not die.

by, Mary Elizabeth Frye

 

Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas)

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/sham-shawnee-county-topeka-kansas

Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas) The last time I did court watch for protective mother CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, I called my subsequent posting on the experience "Showdown in Shawnee County." See the post here:

http://dastardlydads.blogspot.com/2010/02/showdown-in-shawnee-county-we-finally.html

I can't even call the hearing held on October 19, 2010 a showdown. It was just a sham.

Let's do a little review. Claudine is a battered mother who lost custody of her only daughter in an ex parte hearing in 2004. (Ex parte means the mother wasn't even represented at the hearing.) Since then, she has had very little visitation. The hearing in January 2010 (see post above) was supposed to fix that. And finally, Claudine was awarded two hours of unsupervised visitation on Sunday and telephone contact twice a week. We figured it was a start.

Well, this was not to be. And not because of anything Claudine did.

As Claudine testified, visitation went well. She taught her now teenage daughter to drive. They shopped. They went to Barnes and Noble. They talked about girl stuff. Boy stuff. Just like any other mother and daughter. In fact, Claudine was able to enjoy her first mother's day with her daughter in ten years. There were no negative interactions. In fact, it looked like some serious healing was going on.

And in that lays the problem. You see, abusers and their enablers don't like healing. They find that supremely threatening to their power and control. So of course, the process must be stopped lest their domination of the child and the overall "situation" be compromised.

So in May 2010, all visitation stopped at Dad HAL RICHARDSON's personal discretion--which he admitted during his own testimony. He made the unilateral decision that he would no longer take his daughter to the law enforcement center for visitation (presumably at her "request"--but more on that later.) He made sure that during the times of designated phone contact, the phone was never answered as it was set on fax. (67 Direct Contempt's Dad admitted under oath that the phone does go to fax mode when not answered--though he denied "inhibiting" phone access, which is not surprising. But then, how did Mom know to testify that the phone was set on fax when she called? Oh those little details....) But of course, Dad didn't exactly encourage or welcome contact either--that much was evident. In fact, it was pretty clear to me that he was extremely negative about Claudine, and doing his best to crush any contact between her and her daughter.

But like many abusers, he projected his own motives onto the child, now a teenager. SHE was the one who was "uncomfortable." She was the one who was "afraid." Afraid of what? Physical abuse, sexual violence? No, there was no evidence of that beyond vague innuendos about "fighting" that allegedly occurred in the distant past (These innuendos weren't even brought up in January. Must be a new game plan.)

Apparently we are supposed to believe that this teenage girl is "afraid" because Mom allegedly doesn't "follow the rules." What rules? Apparently the court's rules regarding discussion of this case.

All this was echoed by Guardian ad Litem JILL DYKES. And once again, just as in January, Ms. Dykes didn't even feign professional neutrality in this case, as she literally sat at Daddy's elbow the whole time.

Are you kidding me? The typical teenager would blow off a parent's attempt to discuss court matters--ASSUMING any such discussion took place, which Claudine denies. They certainly wouldn't be "afraid" of such a discussion. Annoyed perhaps. But not "afraid" or traumatized. This is just classic projection. That this teenager is such a hothouse flower that she is somehow irreparably injured by any possible or potential references to her parents' legal issues, which I'm sure she already knows all about anyway. Nonsense.

I would humbly suggest that it is Hall Richardson and his enablers who are "afraid" of any possible open or frank discussion of this case. Or any contact between this mother and daughter. And their little "feelings" shouldn't play any part of this.

Under Kansas law, visitation isn't shut off because somebody is "uncomfortable" for vague and specious reasons. If that were the case, then controlling and manipulative parents would be cutting off access for whatever reason they dreamed up that day.

Unfortunately, given the dynamics of domestic violence, children who are in the control of abusers often find it necessary to parrot what the abusers want for their own survival. Which makes if very difficult for this child to speak up and articulate what she wants--except in private to her own mother.

And frankly, this ordeal shows a complete double standard. Were this a custodial mother blocking visitation for such vague and specious reasons, she would no doubt be labeled as an "alienator" with "parental alienation syndrome" (PAS). And the situation would be addressed immediately--either visitation would be enforced by the courts or the mother would lose custody all together. But I digress.

So no visitation from May to the present. But this actually was a minor issue as far as the court was concerned.

No, once again our major concern was Claudine's political activity. The players in Shawnee County are very upset with how well known this case has become (my last blog posting on this case had readers as far away as Australia.) And they are blaming Claudine for all of it, even though when pushed, Judge DAVID DEBENHEIM fiercely denied that he was trying to "stomp" on Claudine's first amendment rights. (Huh. Could have fooled me.)

But even in cases where OTHER bloggers like Nancy Carroll at Rights for Mothers had discussed this case (http://rightsformothers.com/), Claudine was blamed. In fact, the opposing attorney submitted into evidence printouts from NANCY's blog to show that Claudine was out of compliance with their gag order. Message to the Hoffmans: Nancy is not Claudine. I'm not Claudine either, for that matter. And you can't shut us up.

And honestly, did the Hoffmans really have to embarrass their employee like that? They trotted out a young and painfully ignorant employee of theirs to "testify" about Claudine's "alleged" facebook and twitter activities. This fresh-faced young woman--no more than a high school graduate with a few "computer" classes--earnestly told us that every posting and link on somebody's facebook page had to personally "approved" and/or "posted" by that person. Yes, dear friends. She did say that. And meant it too, so far as I can tell. I won't give her name, though it's in my notes. I refuse to further humilate her. But honestly, your great aunt Rose probably knows more about facebook than this girl.

So the significance of this was what? There are supposedly "references" to her case on Claudine's facebook page! Oh the horror! And you know what? This blog may very well end up with a link on Claudine's facebook page, too--through an automatic feed mechanism. It will go straight to facebook--even when Claudine is sleeping or brushing her teeth. Or sitting in court. Because you know what? Claudine is a well networked activist with probably hundreds of facebook friends working on issues related to child abuse, domestic violence, human rights, and family court reform. Many of us have discussed this case before. Just as we have discussed many other cases like this one, where the courts have backed up the abuser and shut out or ignored the protective mother. And for your information, you'll find articles and links about those cases as well.

And all this policing of Claudine's personal and political activities on the internet is particularly hypocritical when you consider the following: Attorney JASON P. HOFFMAN and GAL JILL DYKES had no qualms about violating professional ethical boundaries and becoming facebook "friends" with this child! (I saw the screen shots.) Mom can't even post a photo of her daughter per court order, but these folks feel free to do as they like. Not that the judge was interested in this matter at all. Big surprise there.

And this is the crux of the matter. What the court in Shawnee County REALLY doesn't like is that--as they put it--this lady "has a cause." Or she has "become a cause." They don't like the "venom" (i.e. the truth) that has come out about this case, and the attention it has received nationally and even internationally. They don't even like Claudine's facial expressions! (Yes, the judge made a point of addressing this. "You are your own worst enemy!" he thundered at Claudine--apparently over some grimace or frown that I didn't see.)

So make sure you never show anything but a happy face in front of Judge Debenham, even when you are possibly losing all contact with your only child!

Claudine is supposed to hear later this afternoon what the court's decision is--after her daughter will presumably be allowed to speak her mind with the judge. But of course, she can't really speak her mind--not as long as she's a minor and dependent on her father.

We are not optimistic as to the outcome.

But you know what? In a little over two years, this girl ages out of the system's control over her life. Perhaps then, real change will come about.

Abusers and their enablers often win the battles. But they seldom win the war. That puts off any real healing in this case for another two years.

But at least it's something to hope for.

Continue reading at NowPublic.com: Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas) | NowPublic News Coverage http://www.nowpublic.com/world/sham-shawnee-county-topeka-kansas#ixzz1CN6yB4FW

 

Claudine Dombrowski and the love for her Daughter Rikki Dombrowski – Fly High Fly Free--- they can not chain the wind, no matter how hard they try.

• Claudine Dombrowski: Will She and Her Daughter Finally Get Justice?
• Rikki Dombrowski: Run Like The Wind
• Worldwide Outrage Over Custody Tragedy: Rikki Dombrowski Needs Her Mother
• Rikki Dombrowski: The President of the USA Now Knows WTF is Going On
• Kansas Clown Jason P. Hoffman Corrupts Justice Again: Claudine Dombrowski is Screwed Over As Usual in Court
• Internet Trolls: Don and Jason P. Hoffman
• PHOENIX « MamaLiberty’s Weblog
• WHAT IS SHAWNEE COUNTY HIDING?
• FASTER THAN A FLYING MONKEY!
• WHERE IN THE WORLD IS CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI?
• Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas) protective mother CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI