THREATS TO SILENCE
[This is a work in progress, so keep checking back]
DOCUMENTED THREATS MADE BY COURT OFFICIALS TO SILENCE DAMON'S MOTHER
AND COERCE HER TO ACCEPT DAMON LIVING WITH HIS MOLESTER
[Damon and his brothers were silenced in "Reunification/Threat therapy" where they were told
they would not see their mom again if they did not "cooperate" with the abuser.
See Brainwashing Damon]
Threats made by:
Judge Michael T. Smyth (2003 to 2004)
Dr. Raymond Murphy (Evaluator, 2003)
Minor’s Counsel Terence (Terry) Chucas (2003-2004)
Dr. William "Jay" Dess (Evaluator, 2008)
Tim Smith, Minor’s Counsel for Evan (2008-2009)
Gary Plavnick, Minor’s Counsel for Damon (2008-2010)
Dave Schulman, Minor’s Counsel for Ryan (2008-2009)
Dr. Breffni Barrett, Reunification Therapist (2008-2010)
Judge Lorna Alksne (2008 to present)
[See below for further explanation on how these people all play off each other and how the threats are actually incorporated in court.]
___________________________________________________________________________
Judge Michael T. Smyth (2003 to 2004)
Dr. Raymond Murphy (Evaluator, 2003)
Minor’s Counsel Terence (Terry) Chucas (2003-2004)
Dr. William "Jay" Dess (Evaluator, 2008)
Tim Smith, Minor’s Counsel for Evan (2008-2009)
Gary Plavnick, Minor’s Counsel for Damon (2008-2010)
Dave Schulman, Minor’s Counsel for Ryan (2008-2009)
Dr. Breffni Barrett, Reunification Therapist (2008-2010)
Judge Lorna Alksne (2008 to present)
[See below for further explanation on how these people all play off each other and how the threats are actually incorporated in court.]
___________________________________________________________________________
Threats made by Judge Michael T. Smyth, January, 2004, from the transcript of the official hearing on the abuse which was sabotaged by the minor's counsel's threats, so that Cindy did not have an evidentiary hearing because of fear of losing her children if she acted like she believed Damon. At the hearing, Judge Smyth continues Chucas' threats, with full knowledge there had been no proper abuse investigation and that Cindy had been pressured to forego a real evidentiary hearing via the threats of loss of custody.
"So I need to have something to have as a safety net for the kids and for the Respondent [father] and for yourself [mother] to make sure that you don’t engage in any further conduct or statements that continue this allegation. And that’s true even if it happened. I don’t have the evidence it happened right now [because he deliberately did not do the mandatory investigation which would have produced that evidence], but you have to know in your head that – and in your heart that even if it happened, the only way this family is going to move forward and you’re going to keep these kids is if from here on out, you’re acting like it didn’t happen. And that’s probably – that’s going to be very difficult for you to do that. I think that the only way you’re going to be able to do that is if you know you’re going to lose these kids if you don’t."
Judge Smyth brazenly threatens Cindy on the record in open court that she will lose her children unless she acts like the abuse did not happen, even if it did happen. His only concern is "moving forward" i.e. ignoring the abuse, permitting the father to continue to molest Damon.
And I have great doubts that you [mother] really are ready to move on. I believe that you believe he [father] did it. And as you sit here now, I think you're fearful that you're going to lose these kids because of your zeal and not letting it go...You're changing your tune because you're scared you're going to lose your kids. And I think you ought to be. I don't believe that you decided he didn't do it and that you're ready to move on--that you're necessarily ready to move on. Once you believe that, it's very hard to let go. And I don't think you have demonstrated you've let go through the course of meeting with the experts in this case until, I mean, maybe, maybe in December you started to realize that it's--there's truly a great risk you're going to lose the kids."
Unbelievably, Judge Smyth is getting down on Cindy because the only reason she is agreeing to "move on" is because she will lose her children [which is exactly right].
"And it may be that with just the-- passage of time, if Petitioner [mother] does her job, that it would settle back into –you know, get more and more distant."
Judge Smyth's version of "put it in the past", Cindy's "job" to allow the abuse to happen.
"I think she’s going to need at least some help dealing with what to do next and how to look at these orders and her responsibilities in light of what she probably thinks about all of this, which is probably that we haven’t done anything to protect her kids and that we’re all wrong about it."
This is the pitch for Cindy to be coerced to see a therapist who will inform the court as to whether she is "getting with the program" of shutting up about the abuse....
_______________________________________________________________________________
"So I need to have something to have as a safety net for the kids and for the Respondent [father] and for yourself [mother] to make sure that you don’t engage in any further conduct or statements that continue this allegation. And that’s true even if it happened. I don’t have the evidence it happened right now [because he deliberately did not do the mandatory investigation which would have produced that evidence], but you have to know in your head that – and in your heart that even if it happened, the only way this family is going to move forward and you’re going to keep these kids is if from here on out, you’re acting like it didn’t happen. And that’s probably – that’s going to be very difficult for you to do that. I think that the only way you’re going to be able to do that is if you know you’re going to lose these kids if you don’t."
Judge Smyth brazenly threatens Cindy on the record in open court that she will lose her children unless she acts like the abuse did not happen, even if it did happen. His only concern is "moving forward" i.e. ignoring the abuse, permitting the father to continue to molest Damon.
And I have great doubts that you [mother] really are ready to move on. I believe that you believe he [father] did it. And as you sit here now, I think you're fearful that you're going to lose these kids because of your zeal and not letting it go...You're changing your tune because you're scared you're going to lose your kids. And I think you ought to be. I don't believe that you decided he didn't do it and that you're ready to move on--that you're necessarily ready to move on. Once you believe that, it's very hard to let go. And I don't think you have demonstrated you've let go through the course of meeting with the experts in this case until, I mean, maybe, maybe in December you started to realize that it's--there's truly a great risk you're going to lose the kids."
Unbelievably, Judge Smyth is getting down on Cindy because the only reason she is agreeing to "move on" is because she will lose her children [which is exactly right].
"And it may be that with just the-- passage of time, if Petitioner [mother] does her job, that it would settle back into –you know, get more and more distant."
Judge Smyth's version of "put it in the past", Cindy's "job" to allow the abuse to happen.
"I think she’s going to need at least some help dealing with what to do next and how to look at these orders and her responsibilities in light of what she probably thinks about all of this, which is probably that we haven’t done anything to protect her kids and that we’re all wrong about it."
This is the pitch for Cindy to be coerced to see a therapist who will inform the court as to whether she is "getting with the program" of shutting up about the abuse....
_______________________________________________________________________________
Threats made by Minor’s Counsel,Terry Chucas, in his report in November, 2003, before the first hearing on the abuse:
“The mere warning from the court that she may be at risk of losing the children may be enough to change her conduct.”
The “conduct” he is referring to is Cindy’s efforts to get a proper investigation and to protect Damon. The fact that Chucas put this threat in black and white in a report shows just how brazen court officials can be and get away with it.
“I am not recommending that the children be removed from the mother at this time. If another allegation was made by the mother that turned out to be false or if the mother continues to take unilateral actions concerning Damon, I would make that recommendation.”
Gee, how nice of him that he is not taking the children away from Cindy for trying to get the court to take Damon's reports of abuse seriously and do a proper investigation. First, the allegations were not deemed to be false or fabricated--there had not even been a hearing yet. It was deemed insufficient evidence without the minimum by law complied with to gather evidence. Second, why would any court official ever recommend children be removed from a mother whom he admits believed what her child was telling her?
As for the "Unilateral Actions", Chucas is referring to Cindy bringing Damon to the Chadwick Center to Dr. Williams, to whom he again reported the abuse. This threat was to keep Damon from continuing to disclose abuse with the one person who would listen to him. (The court appointed therapist, Dr. Jacqueline Gang would not talk to Damon about the abuse; she was part of the cover up as are all of the court appointed professionals.)
“To a large degree I believe the issue of custody and visitation turns on whether the Court believes that the mother can control her severe concern for the safety of Damon. If the Court were to conclude that it is likely that more allegations will follow or that the mother will continue to negatively impact Damon’s relationship with the father [code for “parental alienation”] notwithstanding Dr. Murphy’s findings [who did not investigate the abuse], then it is likely that the Court would change primary custody to the father.”
This is the parental alienation tactic first being used by minor’s counsel in 2003 before there was ever a hearing and after the psychologist refused to follow FC 3118 in investigating the abuse.
“While I believe the mother will continue her efforts to persuade authority that the father molested Damon, this is mere speculation on my part. There is an equal probability that she will change her conduct and accept the Court’s findings that there was no molestation, or the mother may believe that her efforts have caused the father to stop molesting Damon. The point is that the mother may well change her conduct [stop trying to protect Damon].”
This statement was made BEFORE there were any findings by the court. Funny how he knew what the findings would be....
Cindy was trying to “persuade authority” to do a proper investigation so they could gather evidence regarding the abuse.
“The most important element is whether the mother can put these events behind her. If she can acknowledge that the clear weight of the evidence is that no molest took place and that her concerns have been adequately addressed by multiple investigations conducted by competent authorities, I would support option one listed below. If the mother still believes that the father molested Damon and believes that either the authorities have got it wrong or that the father outfoxed the professionals, then I believe that option two is the correct approach."
"...the clear weight of the evidence" is misleading at best, considering not even the minimum required by law (FC 3118) was done to gather evidence. Secondly, at this point there had not been findings regarding the molest, so it is clear evidence of the sabotage of due process.
Option one was that the old orders would remain in place with mother having primary custody and visitation to father every Wednesday and every other weekend.
Option two was to give the children half time to the father as an intermediary step to being in his full custody, as there was concern that the children would run away if they gave full custody right away to Eric.
This is the classic “put the abuse in the past” and allow your ex to continue abusing your child or else you will lose custody of your kids tactic. The “You must not believe your child if the court does not think there is enough evidence” tactic—and if you continue to believe your child, you will be considered a danger to them and if you are lucky will get supervised visits.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Terry Chucas' follow through on his threats, November, 2004
“My recommendation is that the Court remove the children from the mother and that she have no contact with them for at least 90 days.”
This recommendation came immediately after Damon reported continuing sexual abuse to his teacher, Ellen Warren, and his principal in October 2004. He also said the children needed to go to "therapy" where they are told they will not see their mom if they don't recant the abuse. Dr. Gardner called it "threat therapy". This eventually happened when they were tricked into coming back from hiding. See Brainwashing Damon in His Own Words.
Cindy took the kids into hiding on November 5th rather than allowing them to be given to the molester.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Judge Alksne (September, 2008), after they came back from hiding:
"I want Father to start thinking about taking over the responsibility in this case until the court reviews mother’s progress [in acting like the abuse didn't really happen] based on what her attorney states to me. And if I have to, I’ll put her back on the stand and ask her about her position in this case...the court is not going to allow her to have legal custody, no contact with the school personnel...the court is taking extraordinary measures to allow the mother to have no contact for at least the first 90 days...Starting in January of 2009, save and except some new circumstances that have arisen regarding mother's inability or refusal to cooperate with the reunification...that means ongoing statements about -- to the community. She has, absolutely, her freedom of speech to have the website, but it does have a bearing on the court under Family Code 3011 as to the children's health, safety and welfare...We're trying to reunify with the father and her continual allegations of child abuse that have not been substantiated by the evidence are not helping."
She is making it very clear here that if Cindy does not "change her position" which, of course, means accept (or at least act like) the abuse did not happen, she will not get custody or unsupervised visitation or be able to participate in the children's school. She is also told to take down the SavingDamon website or she will not get custody. This threat is repeated at almost every hearing. These are common threats to protective moms to silence them and collaborate in sending the children unsupervised to the fathers they say molested them.
"I want Father to start thinking about taking over the responsibility in this case until the court reviews mother’s progress [in acting like the abuse didn't really happen] based on what her attorney states to me. And if I have to, I’ll put her back on the stand and ask her about her position in this case...the court is not going to allow her to have legal custody, no contact with the school personnel...the court is taking extraordinary measures to allow the mother to have no contact for at least the first 90 days...Starting in January of 2009, save and except some new circumstances that have arisen regarding mother's inability or refusal to cooperate with the reunification...that means ongoing statements about -- to the community. She has, absolutely, her freedom of speech to have the website, but it does have a bearing on the court under Family Code 3011 as to the children's health, safety and welfare...We're trying to reunify with the father and her continual allegations of child abuse that have not been substantiated by the evidence are not helping."
She is making it very clear here that if Cindy does not "change her position" which, of course, means accept (or at least act like) the abuse did not happen, she will not get custody or unsupervised visitation or be able to participate in the children's school. She is also told to take down the SavingDamon website or she will not get custody. This threat is repeated at almost every hearing. These are common threats to protective moms to silence them and collaborate in sending the children unsupervised to the fathers they say molested them.
Dr. William “Jay” Dess, Evaluator, July, ‘08
Dr. Dess was hired to investigate the abuse allegations after they came back from hiding, but, like Dr. Murphy, did not comply with FC 3118. He made the "finding" there was insufficient evidence, despite not gathering evidence as per 3118 and concealing the Chadwick Center videotape of Damon reporting the abuse. He makes it clear to Cindy that unless she cooperates with allowing the children to be deprogrammed/brainwashed in "Reunification Therapy" and to Damon being unsupervised with his molester, that she will have no contact with the boys. At this point, she had already not seen the children at all for many months.
"Until or unless the mother participates in an evaluation with the undersigned or is able to convince the court of her ability to support a reunification effort, it is recommended that she have no contact with the children."
"The mother might be helped to understand that the degree to which she is able to engage in the therapeutic process and support the orders of the court/reunification effort, the more likely it is that she will be able to have contact with the children sooner, rather than later."
"For example, it is difficult to determine if any holiday time would be appropriate or feasible between the father and the children, or for that matter, whether any contact with the mother could be beneficial, or at least not harmful."
"Father will have virtually zero chance of effectively reunifying with the children if the children are having ongoing contact with the mother."
Minor’s Counsel, Tim Smith 8/08
"In the event that Mother can present a convincing argument that she will not sabotage the reunification process [i.e. participate in the cover up the abuse], minor’s counsel would change the position recited in the recommendation section of this report with regard to this issue [no contact with the children]."
In May, 2009, Tim Smith puts in a report that Cindy must "adjust her thinking" in $200/hr. therapy with the boys before she can "move up" to $50/hr. supervised visitation. Cindy was never going to say the abuse did not happen so she quit the expensive therapy with Dr. Barrett. Notice the 180 flip flop in his monologue about this:
"Throughout this hearing, this proceeding, we have heard argument and in the form of questions references to mother's assertion that she's been asked to adjust her thinking and to deny that the molest -- alleged molest occurred...There is not a single scintilla of evidence that I ever made that statement. There is no evidence before this court that I ever made that statement...
I wholeheartedly accept responsibility for indicating to mother the need for her to adjust her thinking. I must have told her that five times. I think the court in essence, told her that at the September hearing, and subsequent to that. The need for her to adjust her thinking in some context is a large part of what we have been going through."
Here Smith admits that is the court's goal: to get Cindy to say the abuse did not really happen and torture her with loss of her children until she does. This is extortion using children as hostages.
Minor’s Counsel for Damon, Gary Plavnik 8/08
"No unsupervised contact until recommended by Dr. Carlson."
Of course, since Dr. Craig Carlson is helping to cover up the abuse, he goes along with keeping the kids away from their mom in the effort to silence them.
Minor’s Counsel for Ryan, Dave Schulman 8/08
"Placing Ryan with his mother in the undersigned’s opinion would not be in his best interest as she is clearly not willing to work on reunification."
Guess he had not heard that by the time he wrote his report, Cindy had caved to the threats and agreed to "Reunification" and unsupervised visits so she wouldn't lose custody.
"Ryan shall have supervised visits with his mother, however the case manager shall have the discretion to reduce Ryan’s visits with his mother if he refused to participate in the reunification process."
This is the threat made to all the boys: that if they did not actively "reunify" with Eric, they would not see their mom. They had already not seen her for five months by this time, so that they were already worn down.
Judith Klein, Last Minor's Counsel for Damon, June 29,2010:
"Most importantly for Damon, this means his mother working with Mr. Corrigan and making progress in putting the past behind them. Once Mr. Corrigan believes mother has made this progress he can provide a report to her which can be presented to the Court as a basis for a change in the current custody and visitation orders."
Just one more professional recommending that unless Cindy "put the abuse in the past" and a professional documents it, she will not get custody or further visitation.
"Most importantly for Damon, this means his mother working with Mr. Corrigan and making progress in putting the past behind them. Once Mr. Corrigan believes mother has made this progress he can provide a report to her which can be presented to the Court as a basis for a change in the current custody and visitation orders."
Just one more professional recommending that unless Cindy "put the abuse in the past" and a professional documents it, she will not get custody or further visitation.
_____________________________________________
These threats made in Damon's case demonstrate how court officials
enable fathers to molest their own children; or as it is often referred to: "grow their own victims"...
Sexual abuse cases follow a well documented pattern of intimidation and threats in Family Courts:
These threats made in Damon's case demonstrate how court officials
enable fathers to molest their own children; or as it is often referred to: "grow their own victims"...
Sexual abuse cases follow a well documented pattern of intimidation and threats in Family Courts:
The concepts and almost exact wording are used in sexual abuse cases across the country and the world. It is as if there is a Molesters Manual on how to use the courts to terrorize and silence women and children about abuse by fathers, and enable them to get custody of their victims. Much of it we know comes from and is justified by pedophile Richard Gardner’s bogus Parental Alienation Theory.
Cases are prematurely and without credible evidence deemed to be Parental Alienation (PA) cases and then follow a particular predictable pattern. When the child reports abuse, an evaluation is ordered. The evaluator chosen by the courts is already known to support PA/cover up of abuse. S/he does not do a proper investigation or comply with the law in doing the minimum to gather evidence of abuse. That facilitates being able to make conclusions based on PA, which are simply biased opinions. In the report, there will be either thinly or thickly veiled threats that if Mom does not stop in her supposedly misguided efforts to protect her child, she will lose custody and unsupervised visitation.
The court also appoints therapists for the children and mother who are in on the PA game. Their job is to get into their minds and make sure they are going along with the PA program. The court officials ask them whether they are complying or not, and if not, they are not allowed to see each other. In many cases a "Reunification Therapist" is hired specifically to threaten the children to comply, hence it's previous name of "Threat Therapy".
Then, armed with the evaluator’s report, a Minor’s Counsel, who is also a PA supporter appointed by the court, will write his/her own report with opinions which rely on the evaluator’s report. S/he comes up with recommendations (threats) of loss of custody if Mom does not stop trying to protect her child(ren) and allow unsupervised visitation. In Damon’s case, just before Minor’s Counsel wrote his pre-trial report, he actually pressured Cindy through her complicit attorney, Bill Eddy, to sign a declaration under oath saying she really did not think the abuse happened. This is a common ploy which is later used against the mom to confirm they were false allegations. But Cindy refused, saying it was perjury. She agreed under duress to say she would accept that the court did not think there was enough evidence of abuse and would agree to unsupervised visitation in order to maintain custody—a very painful decision.
Note that this is all happening BEFORE there is any evidentiary hearing, so the case is over before it even goes to “trial”. Since they are all in on it, they let the mom know the court is not going to listen to her, so she may as well give up. They all play off of each other. Judges make their own threats in the form of findings and orders to further intimidate the mother into submitting to the child being sent to be unsupervised or live with the abuser.
This pattern happened twice in two different courts with two different sets of players in Damon’s case, so it is a very good example.
(If you are lucky enough to have a good attorney, you might get to the trial stage and be able to have a semblance of due process and present actual evidence, at which other tactics are then used to conceal or transmute the evidence and discredit the mothers and children.)
Cases are prematurely and without credible evidence deemed to be Parental Alienation (PA) cases and then follow a particular predictable pattern. When the child reports abuse, an evaluation is ordered. The evaluator chosen by the courts is already known to support PA/cover up of abuse. S/he does not do a proper investigation or comply with the law in doing the minimum to gather evidence of abuse. That facilitates being able to make conclusions based on PA, which are simply biased opinions. In the report, there will be either thinly or thickly veiled threats that if Mom does not stop in her supposedly misguided efforts to protect her child, she will lose custody and unsupervised visitation.
The court also appoints therapists for the children and mother who are in on the PA game. Their job is to get into their minds and make sure they are going along with the PA program. The court officials ask them whether they are complying or not, and if not, they are not allowed to see each other. In many cases a "Reunification Therapist" is hired specifically to threaten the children to comply, hence it's previous name of "Threat Therapy".
Then, armed with the evaluator’s report, a Minor’s Counsel, who is also a PA supporter appointed by the court, will write his/her own report with opinions which rely on the evaluator’s report. S/he comes up with recommendations (threats) of loss of custody if Mom does not stop trying to protect her child(ren) and allow unsupervised visitation. In Damon’s case, just before Minor’s Counsel wrote his pre-trial report, he actually pressured Cindy through her complicit attorney, Bill Eddy, to sign a declaration under oath saying she really did not think the abuse happened. This is a common ploy which is later used against the mom to confirm they were false allegations. But Cindy refused, saying it was perjury. She agreed under duress to say she would accept that the court did not think there was enough evidence of abuse and would agree to unsupervised visitation in order to maintain custody—a very painful decision.
Note that this is all happening BEFORE there is any evidentiary hearing, so the case is over before it even goes to “trial”. Since they are all in on it, they let the mom know the court is not going to listen to her, so she may as well give up. They all play off of each other. Judges make their own threats in the form of findings and orders to further intimidate the mother into submitting to the child being sent to be unsupervised or live with the abuser.
This pattern happened twice in two different courts with two different sets of players in Damon’s case, so it is a very good example.
(If you are lucky enough to have a good attorney, you might get to the trial stage and be able to have a semblance of due process and present actual evidence, at which other tactics are then used to conceal or transmute the evidence and discredit the mothers and children.)