Congenitally Corrupt: Mass Probate & Judge Menno

Posted: September 23, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Doctor Gabrielle Sousa, Doctor John L. Stanley, Judge Menno, Margaret Kenney, Margaret Vannata | Leave a comment

Congenitally Corrupt: Mass Probate & Judge Menno

 

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

 

PLYMOUTH, ss                              PROBATE AND FAMILY COURT

                                                      DOCKET NO. PL02D1047FM1

 

XXXXX XXXX             )

                  PLAINTIFF                  )       

and                                        )        PLAINTIFF’s PRE-TRIAL

                                             )        MEMORANDUM

MARGARET KENNEY,          )       

                  DEFENDANT – Marshfield, Mass

        

 

NOW COMES CCCCC XXXX, the Plaintiff in the above-entitled Complaint for Modification, and sets forth the following in accordance with the Notice of Pre-Trial Conference as follows:

 

  1. Date, time, and place of in-person meeting, and who was present.

As of this writing (9-10-2016), Attorney Ward has agreed that the defendant and the plaintiff, along with Attorney Ward, will meet at Brockton Probate at 3:00 PM on 9-16-2016. The purpose of this meeting is the 4-Way.

  1. Uncontested Facts:

The plaintiff will prepare within the next week or two, or as required by the court in advance of the trial.

III.    Contested Issues of Fact and Law:

  1. The parenting plan for the parties’ son, Chris, is in dispute.  The father enjoyed joint physical custody of the child, along with unsupervised visitation and overnight stays, up until Judge Menno’s December 28, 2011 ruling. On the December 28, 2011 ruling, Judge Menno awarded the mother, the Defendant, sole physical custody, and ordered supervised visitation for the father, the Plaintiff. Supervised visitation was effectively ended on Judge Menno’s October 23, 2012 ruling. The father, the Plaintiff, is putting forth three key arguments in support of his request for modification, and the restoration of unsupervised visitation and phone calls.

  2. First Argument: As the Plaintiff verbally argued before Judge YYYYYYYs on April 11, 2016, at an emergency hearing, the father states that he is a good father. Specifically, the father has never missed a child support payment; the father has never allowed the health insurance to lapse; the father has no criminal record; the father has never been to rehab or tested positive for illicit substances (nor did Judge Menno during the three year long trial, or his surrogate – Attorney Dorsey – Parenting Coordinator – ever order a drug test); in the eleven years that the father enjoyed scheduled unsupervised visitation with his son, Chris, he never once missed a visit; the father has maintained – and actually overpaid- into his son’s college fund, as stipulated and agreed to within the Divorce Agreement/Decree (interestingly, the Defendant and her attorney, in 2016, never requested of the Plaintiff a copy of Chris’s college fund statement, neither in their interrogatories or request for documents); the psychologist, Dr. Laura Okin, who saw the Plaintiff, post-Menno ruling of December 2011, has stated in writing that the father is mentally fit to see his son, Chris, in an unsupervised capacity. Moreover, the father enjoyed a rich and rewarding relationship with his son. This strong relationship extended to a point that Chris asked the guardian ad litem, appointed by the Menno court (Dr. Richard Wolman), to live with his father five times. Mr. Wolman testified to this on the first day of trial in July 2011. Mr. Wolman testified that same day that he threatened Chris – that he’d tell his mother on him – if he ever made the request to live with his father again. (As Plymouth probate clerks have stated that much of the evidence and information from that 2011 trial has been deleted or purged, the father, fortunately, has on digital disk the testimony from the 2011 trial, and will present into evidence Dr. Wolman’s first day of testimony.) In October 2011, the mother also testified that Chris loved his father, and missed him as a result of change in visitation enforced by Judge Menno’s surrogate, Attorney Dorsey.

The father wishes to express his gratitude to Judge YYYYYYYs for reopening this matter. This is especially meaningful, since Judge Menno in his December 28, 2011 ruling expressly forbid the plaintiff from seeking modification, or filing litigation in regards this matter, unless it was through Judge Menno’s court and with his permission. Not only was this the Plaintiff’s understanding, but clearly the Defendant, and Attorney Ward, have stated the same belief on several occasions in 2016. Which brings us to my second argument.

  1. Second Argument: Judge Menno’s ruling(s) were a judicial overreach. Judge Menno’s rulings were an assault upon the father’s 1st, and possibly 6th and 7th Amendment rights. And finally, Judge Menno’s ruling(s) have caused, possibly, irreparable harm to the father’s and son’s relations, and may have lead to child alienation from his father. As a preamble to these arguments, please know Judge YYYYYYYs that it is not the Plaintiff’s goal to retry the case, from the period January 2010 through November 2013. Having said that, and in order to demonstrate both my arguments and the time line of events (and since the evidence from the aforementioned trial dates has been deleted, as relayed to me by Plymouth County Probate clerks), unfortunately, I must cover some of the key events during that period. And it is also important to cover Judge Menno’s and his surrogate’s, the Parent Coordinator’s, reaction and rulings to the events of that period. In regards, Judicial overreach, the father requests that Judge YYYYYYY’s reads Judge Menno’s December 28, 2011 ruling, where under item #9, Judge Menno prohibited the father from filing any further modifications, or “complaints for contempt,” except by Mr. Menno’s written permission. My attorney, Ms. DiGregorio, informed me that this provision meant that I could not appeal Judge Menno’s decision(s), nor sue any of the professionals involved in this case, unless granted express permission by Judge Menno’s court. To the best of the Plaintiff’s knowledge, Judge Menno has no such power. This is why the Plaintiff filed for an emergency hearing on this matter, late Winter 2016, because Judge Menno had finally left Plymouth County, and his cases were assigned to a new judge. Moreover, the Plaintiff in early 2016 requested that Judge Menno review his prior decisions, and Judge Menno passed on my request, citing that his caseload had been transferred to Judge Stanton. Judge Menno’s December 28, 2011 ruling arguably violated the Plaintiff’s right(s) to appeal the Judge’s decision, and pursue civil litigation against the professional(s) in this matter, whom the father argues failed to adequately protect the child, Chris, and some of whom gave false testimony during the course of the trial. Particularly threatening to the father’s constitutional rights, however, was Judge Menno’s (and his surrogate’s) use of child visitation, and restrictions of same, as means to shut down, or certainly punish, the father for exercising his first amendment right of freedom of speech, and freedom of political speech. A quick synopsis of events leading up to the removal of the father’s visitation privileges, which first occurred in August 2011, and again, in October 2012, shows that the father had published, as his First Amendment right, court documents and evidence submitted into the aforementioned trial. During this first event, the father published a blog, entitled FreeChris.com, in August 2011. The father had published the blog out of desperation, as the trial had already dragged out 20 months – since he had originally hired his attorney – with no foreseeable end in sight, and the father had heard the proceeding week, during a parenting coordinator meeting, that Chris was now suicidal under his mother’s care (The father had heard from the mother that Chris had been acting out all Summer long while under his mother’s care, this is in addition to medically documented evidence that Chris had lost 15lbs under his mother’s care, plus a whole host of other issues & concerns regarding the mother’s parenting; the weight loss episodes, and circumstances surrounding my son’s weight loss, were also confirmed by Sandy Durland III, Esq., brother-in-law to State Rep., James Cantwell, the Defendant’s former attorney). The father will provide evidence of Chris’s suicidal behavior, while under his mother’s care, from Attorney Dorsey’s parenting coordinator meeting notes of June & August 2011 (as well as, written documentation from Doctor Sousa of Pembroke MA, who discovered Chris’s 15 pounds of weight loss, which occurred under the Defendant’s care). As a result of the father publishing the blog in August 2011, Attorney Dorsey stripped the father of all visitation privileges and immediately demanded that the web site, FreeChris.com, be shut down. Despite the father shutting down the web site, due to coercion from Attorney Dorsey and the resulting loss of contact with his son, visitation was not reinstated until Spring 2012, and then, only in a supervised capacity. Judge Menno again used visitation as a tool in an attempt to censor the Plaintiff in his October 2012 ruling, shortly after the father published the book, Mrs. Marshfield. Marshfield consists almost entirely of courtroom documents, filings, and evidence presented during the three-year trial period. Judge Menno states in his October 23, 2012 ruling that: “Mr. XXXX has a First Amendment right to publish his book, but he does not have a constitutional right to injure the mental and emotional wellbeing of his minor child.” As of this date, neither the mother, the Defendant, nor her attorney, Mr. Ward, has ever presented evidence that Chris was harmed, neither emotionally or mentally, by any of the father’s publications, nor did Judge Menno ever ask for such evidence. In addition to the pattern of the father publishing information that ran counter to the narrative Judge Menno, and the Defendant’s attorney(ies), were attempting to build around the case (an “official” narrative that completely ignored the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff and his attorney, Ms. DiGregorio), correlated or followed by the removal of the Plaintiff’s visitation time, the father had also ably convinced – via evidence – then State Senator Hedlund to file a formal complaint against Judge Menno with the Commission of Judicial Conduct (on November 19, 2012). In short, Judge Menno, and his surrogate, showed a pattern of punishing the father, w/ the removal of child visitation, as retribution for the father publishing the facts of this case, both on line and through a book published on Amazon.com. In publishing these materials, the father’s stated aim has always been to educate the public, and to seek Massachusetts Probate Court reform. That said, the father removed the web site and the book from publication in advance of a hearing in Fall 2013, but by then, Judge Menno was furious, both at the prior publications and for being brought up before the Commission of Judicial Conduct; and the father’s visitation rights were not reinstated. What to make of a Judge who would use child visitation as a means to attempt to censor, and silence, written criticism, both factual and political, of the Massachusetts’ Probate system?   Clearly, Judge Menno’s actions, probably, alienated son from father. Is child alienation permitted under Massachusetts’ law or code, as a means of retribution or punishment? It is the Plaintiff’s fervent nightly prayer, that Judge YYYYYYYs will right this egregious wrong and gross miscarriage of justice.

  2. Third Argument: The Plaintiff has no idea of what the ARC attorney will report back to the YYYYYYYs’ court. Both the Defendant and her attorney already claim that Chris does not wish to see his father (which begs a whole host of alternative questions). However, the father – despite assurances from his sister (Chris’s –Aunt) that the son loves his father and expressed a desire to see his father– must entertain the possibility that Chris, for any number of reasons (including relentless pressure from his mother), may have expressed a desire not to restore visitation with his father (particularly after being forcibly estranged from his father by the Menno court for these many years). Therefore, the father wishes to preemptively argue that parental alienation may have occurred, and that the full weight of this alienation be attributed to Judge Menno and his parenting coordinator appointee, Counsel Michele Dorsey. The separation between father and son was involuntary, and was made mandatory solely by Judge Menno’s – and surrogate’s – orders. When supervised visitation was restored, it was cumbersome, awkward, unnecessarily supervised (per the father’s therapist), and expensive (which the father believes was the point of the entire exercise, Judge Menno meant to drive the father away or visitation to be both punitive and embarrassing).

The father waited three long years for Judge Menno to vacate Plymouth County, and once that occurred, the father took this matter before a new Judge to hear this matter, as quickly as possible, and on an emergency basis.

 

The father, therefore, asks the YYYYYYY’s court to restore visitation to one weekend per month (fitted around Chris’s activities and schedule), and phone calls up to three times weekly, where the father is permitted to speak to his son, immediately. The father is not asking for a change in custody. The father very much wants to aid and assist Chris in his review and selection of colleges, and wants to play an active role in his son’s life. The father wants Judge YYYYYYYs to know that – despite the alienation created by the Menno court and the Defendant – that his love for his son is unconditional. In the State of Maryland, rapists have greater parental rights than the Plaintiff. The father has witnessed, through sitting in Plymouth probate for countless hours, that Massachusetts’ parents – with significant addiction and mental health issues – have substantive parental rights and visitation privileges. The Plaintiff is merely asking that these same visitation privileges be afforded to him and his son, Chris.

  1. Status of Discovery:

Discovery is largely complete, albeit the Defendant and counsel refused to provide Chris’s medical and mental health records. These records, particularly the latter, may provide additional support to the Plaintiff’s assertion that Chris wishes to visit his father, misses him, and loves him. Here, the Plaintiff is request that Judge YYYYYYYs order the Defendant to release Chris’s medical and mental health records to the Plaintiff, from the period of January 2010 to the present.

  1. Child Custody

Child Custody is not an issue, the father is not seeking a change in custody.

  1. Possible Witnesses:

  2. The Mother;

  3. Plaintiff’s Sister;

  4. Dr. John Stanley of _Pembroke_, Chris’s pediatrician;

  5. Dr. Gabrielle_ Sousa of _Pembroke___, another pediatrician;

  6. Keepers of Records for all documents set forth above; and

  7. Any and all other documents or materials necessary to enable the Father to present his position accurate and fully.

The Father reserves the right to supplement this list should this matter go to trial.

 

 

VII.   Evidence:

 

  1. Judge Menno’s aforementioned rulings;

  2. Parenting Coordinator, Attorney Dorsey’s, October meeting notes;

  3. Parenting Coordinator, Attorney Dosrey’s, order – ending visitation;

  4. GAL, Dr. Richard Wolman’s, digitized testimony;

  5. Sousa’s written responses to the Mass Board of Medicine;

  6. Stanley’s letter, and response to the Mass Board of Medicine;

  7. Okin’s letter clearing father to see Chris;

  8. Pictures of Chris and Father together, illustrating Chris’s happiness.

The Father reserves the right to supplement this list should this matter go to trial.

VIII: Depositions
The Plaintiff plans on conducting no depositions.

IX & X: Property Division & Alimony

These are not matters before the court.

  1. Estimate of Trial Time:

The Father anticipates that the trial of this matter will take two (2) or more days depending upon the witnesses called and upon the ability of counsel to stipulate to facts along with exhibits in advance of trial.

XII: Financials Issues:

The Father has filed his current financial statement but contends that there are no financial issues involved in this matter.

As of this writing, the father has not received a formal filing on the part of the Defendant, nor Mr. Ward, to amend their response to the modification to include – revisiting college funding. If the Defendant desires to move this request forward, the father will have a formal response to this request. As college funding is specifically covered in the divorce agreement, along with specified funding, it is the father’s contention – based upon Massachusetts case law – that the Judge may not reopen this issue. See McCarthy V. McCarthy, 36 Mass. App.Ct. 490 (1994).

XIII: Child Support

Child support is no longer in contention and is agreed upon.

Respectfully submitted,

XXXXX XXXX

Dated: September 16, 2016

I Tried…

Posted: August 30, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Doctor Gabrielle Sousa, Judge Menno, Margaret Kenney | Leave a comment

 

For those who object to the publication of Mrs. Marshfield, and this web site by the same name, they would do well to remember that I attempted to take an alternative path in Fall of 2013, when I shut down the sale of the book and this web site in advance of a hearing w/ Judge Menno.   Both the sale of the book, and the MrsMarshfield.com web site, had been shut down for 90 to 120 days in advance of the 2013 hearing date.

 

My reward for shutting down same (which are presumably a source of embarrassment for the mother, and the professionals involved in this case) was three years of parental alienation from my son, on top of the alienation that had already occurred; and so upon receiving Judge Menno’s 2013 ruling, both the website and the sale of the book, Mrs. Marshfield, went right back up for public consumption and sale, respectively.

 

The goal in publication of Mrs. Marshfield has always been to educate the public on the manner in which Plymouth County probate conducts itself. If it’s a source of embarrassment, perhaps the courts should look towards reform?  As a multi-billion dollar industry, my guess is there will be no reform anytime soon (even though there are non-adversarial/well proven family law models in Northern Europe).

 

As a father, I had a perfect visitation record; I have no criminal record; and I have never missed a support payment.   The medical insurance has never lapsed. There are rapist in Maryland who have greater parental rights than I do; there are drug addicts and alcoholics in Massachusetts that have greater parental rights than I do.  And I am none of these things.  In 2011, both the mother and the professionals in this case testified the son loved his dad, and Dr. Wolman (the GAL) testified as to the son’s frequent requests to live w/ his father.

 

I have told the truth is this matter. I have published the truth is this matter (backed up by medical documentation), and my son and I have been rewarded with the unjust and unjustifiable abuse of judicial power. Judge Menno cut off my right to appeal and to seek redress, except through his courts. That is to say, I had no right of appeal.

 

Judge Menno is no longer in Plymouth County. Here’s hoping and praying the new Judge has a greater appreciation for First Amendment rights, and does not believe child visitation should be used as a tool of vengeance for publishing the truth.  If this blog and the book are in the way of father and son reuniting, the Judge should have the courage to say as much.  The questions remain however, what other forms of censorship does the Judge wish to impose?  And finally, if the mother and professionals in this case did not file for defamation because the father in fact published the truth, should child visitation be used as a means of retribution by those in power?

 

 

Looking forward to receiving some answers soon.  Here’s to the truth and honest judges, wherever they may be found.

 

Judge Menno goes full on Megalomanical & Assumes the Power of God

Posted: April 11, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Judge Menno, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

From Judge Menno’s 12-28-2011 Ruling:

 

“Father is prohibited from filing any new complaints for modification, or complaints of contempt without written permission though this court.”

Winter Exposure and Neglect: Judge Menno – Norfolk County Probate; Dr. Richard Wolman – Boston Psychologist; and Attorney Michele Dorsey – Scituate, MA condone:

Posted: January 27, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Doctor Wolman, Guardian Ad Litem, Jim Cantwell, Judge Menno, Margaret Kenney, Margaret Vannata, Marshfield Public School District, Michele Dorsey, Plymouth County Probate Court | Leave a comment

Winter ExposureWinter Exposure

 

Judge Menno – Norfolk County Probate; Dr.  Richard Wolman – Boston Psychologist; and Attorney Michele Dorsey – Scituate, MA…  condone:

  1.  Child neglect;

  2.  Methodically underfeeding a ten year old child, so as to cause a medically documented 15 pounds weight loss;

  3.  Suicidal thoughts of a child, while living under the primary caregiver’s roof;

  4.  Dr. Wolman threatening the child, if he continued to ask to live with his father;

  5.  And parental alienation.

Judge Menno: Formal Letter of Complaint by Senator Hedlund

Posted: January 11, 2016 | Author: | Filed under: Judge Menno | Leave a comment

Menno Formal Complaint_000001

Excerpt: Judge Menno’s Ruling: 10-23-2012

Posted: June 18, 2015 | Author: | Filed under: Judge Menno | Leave a comment

Mr. ____ has a first amendment right to publish his book (aka Mrs. Marshfield)…

Patience Personified

Posted: March 29, 2015 | Author: | Filed under: Doctor Levin, Doctor Wolman, Jim Cantwell, Judge Menno, Margaret Kenney, Michele Dorsey, Mrs. Marshfield | 3 Comments

Ultimately, all evidence rolls up to the judge, and it is at his or her discretion to pull truth from conjecture, speculation and lies. I’ve seen a pile of documented evidence in this case ignored. A probate judge also has the ability to intervene throughout a case and do the right thing. While some judges, within the U.S. judicial system, have limited discretion in their sentencing, probate judges perhaps have some of the broadest authority and discretion in sentencing and how they conduct their courtroom.

The probate judge’s power appears unlimited. They serve without term limit, and are not democratically elected. Moreover, based upon my correspondence with the Massachusetts Bar concerning Attorney Michele Dorsey (Scituate, MA) and her role in this matter it is my understanding that all complaints and disciplinary action, in regards Attorney Dorsey and her role as both mediator and parenting coordinator, also rolls up to Judge Menno. There appear to be no Massachusetts rules or laws governing the Guardian Ad Litem role either. Here again, any complaints or issues concerning same appear to be within the Judge’s domain.

But who is ultimately responsible for Judge Menno, and his professional behavior?

Judge Menno sat in the same trial that I witnessed, and presumably saw the same evidence and heard the same testimony I did. The evidence my attorney and I brought to this case was not refuted, and there was plenty of evidence suggesting that the many collaterals, and court appointees, in this case had either lied at various points in this process, or were inept in their roles and failed to perform. But perhaps this is standard operating procedure in Plymouth County Probate System? Or maybe this just they way Judge Menno conducts his courtroom affairs.

If Judge Menno thought this case was “frivolous,” and I fail to see how underfeeding a nine year old boy to the tune of fifteen pounds, et al., then why did he conduct four day trial?  If the matter had already been decided prior to the fourth day of trail than why conduct it? And to hear both father’s and mother’s attorneys speak – it appears that the matter was a foregone conclusion (see proceeding chapter). Unless conducting the trial was strategic in nature, and there was another motive? Either way, serious resources were brought to bear, and this money could have gone to Chris and/or his future.

And I’m afraid that money is what this entire matter was about, almost certainly from Margaret Kenney’s perspective, and possibly from the perspective of the Probate Industrial Complex. After all, there are professionals to feed. That Chris undoubtedly suffered at the hands of his mother is in no doubt from my perspective or the perspective of my son. And I believe any rational adult reading this book will concur. The suffering endured by my son was both physical and psychological in nature, while under the care of his mother.   And I little doubt that my son’s suffering continues to this very day. Having been rewarded by the courts for her behavior, one cannot imagine that Margaret changed her behavior, but rather her behavior was reinforced by Judge Menno.

What I have not discussed in this book is the role my son’s therapist played in this matter, Doctor Sol Levin. And there is a great deal that I do not know about this man’s relationship with my son. I do know this however, early in the process Dr. Sol Levin called me into his office after a visit with Chris, and asked for the GAL’s name and address. The doctor was visibly upset, and clearly wanted to discuss this matter with the authorities or the GAL. Chris opened up to me after this session that he had unloaded to Doctor Levin, like a “volcano,” all that was going on in his mother’s home. And yet, in the GAL report, as documented and testified to on the first day of trial, Doctor Wolman only spent fifteen minutes with my son’s therapist, Dr. Levin. So the only independent and professional source, who supposedly knew and spent time with my son, and Doctor Wolman allocates fifteen minutes with this individual, my son’s therapist.

Sounds like the fix was in.

Doctor Levin is yet another of Judge Menno appointees. As such he’s just another member of the Probate Industrial Complex. Doctor Levin and I spoke a couple of times, and he seemed very much in awe of attorney Dorsey. Of course, after this case was over there would be other cases and possible referrals down the road. It wouldn’t do for a member of the probate industrial complex to rock the boat, and cut oneself off from a peer or upset another professional or colleague. The peer pressure for these professionals to mutually agree, and get along and go along must be tremendous. In November 2011, after I had not seen Chris for three months my attorney recommended that I call Doctor Levin to learn how my son was doing. One of the key things Doctor Levin had to say during our call was that Chris missed me and asked about me often. He also went on to say that the professionals involved in this case were deciding if I should be reintroduced into Chris’ life.

It appears that the professionals in the case were so disturbed by my blog, that nobody read, that they would exact retribution by withholding visitation from my son.

What follows is a timeline and a brief narrative on my interaction with the Plymouth County Probate Court. As for the findings of fact, Judge Menno appears to have copied attorney Cantwell’s findings, verbatim typos and all.   We were told in the 2.5 months leading up to Judge Menno’s decision that he was working very hard on the case, and putting forth a great deal of time and energy into his decision making, per his secretary or judicial assistant.

As the reader will see… from the date Chris asked me if his mother was trying to kill him (by deliberately withholding food) to the date the ruling was rendered was almost two years. Of course, Maragaret’s Attorney, State Rep. James Cantwell, promised he would drag this trial out indefinitely, against the wishes and best interests of my son.

Many have said I lacked patience in the handling of this trial; but when your son is manipulated like a pawn by Massachusetts Legal professionals (and is suicidal while under his mother’s care), out of presumed maliciousness and greed, what’s a father to do but expose these individuals for their corruption and incompetence. Two years to try this case, and another year of court room proceedings – initiated by Margaret afterwards – I believe I deserve an award for patience.

Probate Court Time Line of Events:

May 2010:

Michele Dorsey of Safe Harbor is appointed parenting coordinator against the wishes of the father, by Judge Menno.

Michele Dorsey’s documented bias against the father in the case, not withstanding.

Instead of appointing a GAL to investigate this matter, the Judge agrees to have both parties go in for psychological evaluation. This psychological testing option, in lieu of the appointment of the GAL, originated from Margaret, her attorney and Michele Dorsey.

Father appeals the Judge’s appointment of a parenting coordinator, providing among many reasons that the judge does not have the authority to appoint a parenting coordinator.   The judge denies the appeal.

October 2010:

Father files for contempt because of Margaret’s refusal to adhere to Judge’s orders that they submit to psychological review.  Of course, psychological review was Margaret’s idea in May 2010, in lieu of appointing a GAL. Jim Cantwell indicates that he did not know the costs involved with a psychological exam when they originally recommended it in May 2010.

The judge declines to hold Margaret in contempt, and reverses his earlier order- rescinding the order for psychological review.

Chris is to begin attending therapy, as ordered by the judge.

The court declines to appoint a GAL.

November 2010:

The judge reverses himself, again, and agrees that a GAL should investigate this matter.

Trial is scheduled for 6-20 and 6-22-11.

January 2011:

Two months later, the judge handpicks Dr. Wolman to be the GAL.

Doctor Wolman’s track record in this matter and testimony speak for themselves, and are possibly a reflection upon the judge and the probate system.

February 2011

Without explanation the Judge shortens the trial to a single day in June.

May 2011

Dr. Wolman (Judge Menno’s appointee) authorized Margaret to conduct her own investigation on the father’s property with a very upset child, Chris, in tow.

Parenting coordinator, Michele Dorsey, (also Judge’s appointee) also thinks that Margaret conducting an investigation on my property is a good idea in the presence of Chris, and states it’s a matter of “safety.”

(Interesting: When my son we beaten up by neighborhood bullies, at his mother’s residence, and threatened with a BB gun (or when Chris was suicidal under his mother’s care), Michele Dorsey – Judge Menno’s appointee – did not feel that this was a matter of “safety.”)

Father files a restraining order against the mother, due to concerns for his safety and his son’s safety.

Judge Menno agrees to a hearing on the restraining order request.

Judge Menno at the hearing denies restraining order and indicates that the father has made “big mistake” in filing the restraining order.

GAL, Doctor Wolman, issues his report, nearly 60 days late, and eight thousand dollars over the amount budgeted by the court.

It is clear to the father, and this is later revealed in court testimony, and documented in this book, that the GAL appears not to have done his job (by any reasonable standard or expectation), and did not investigate, or simply ignored, the father’ complaints and concerns.

Subsequently, the Judge does not hold the GAL accountable

June 2011

The Probate court is overbooked, and the trail is postponed for July.  This is the first time the trial is delayed.

However, the Judge agrees to hear an emergency request by Team Margaret (comprised of Margaret, her attorney, Michele Dorsey of Safe Harbor and Doctor Wolman) that father’s visits with son should be supervised.  Team Margaret now allege Chris is suicidal, but fail to recognize that he lives with his mother, 99% of the time.

Dr. Wolman and Parenting Coordinator, Michele Dorsey, testify on the mother’s behalf; however, they offer no new information, since the GAL report was issued which recommended no change in custody or visitation.  Michele Dorsey of Safe Harbor Mediation was aware of Chris’ suicidal thoughts, allegedly made in Margaret’s home, and took no action against the father earlier in the month of June (two weeks prior to the June hearing), during a parenting coordinator session.

Nor did the child therapist express any concerns, during the month of June.  My attorney describes this as a “trial by ambush.”

July 2011

We appear in court in July, and again, the court is overbooked for the second time; and for the two day’s scheduled in July for trial, we only hear two hours of testimony.  This is the second time the trial is delayed.

The judge appears ill, and the proceedings are cancelled short, with the idea that we are to continue in August.  There are no court dates in August.  This is the third time this trial is delayed.

Dr. Wolman reveals in court testimony that he did not investigate many of the documented and acknowledged allegations made by father against the mother and her collaterals.

Despite Dr. Wolman’s credibility issue, the judge takes no action.

August 2011:

Father, out of fear and concern for his son’s safety, and because of the inconsistencies in the Plymouth County Probate court (including by this time, three trial delays), and in order to advance his son’s wishes to live with his father, begins publishing his blog.  The blog makes no threats to anyone, but merely publishes many of the facts of the case, much of which are or will be a matter of public record.

Parenting coordinator, Michele Dorsey (the Judge appointee) orders the blog shut down, and suspends visitation, stating the blog harms the son.

Father told to shut down his site by his attorney, and father immediately complies.  Suspension of visitation, however, remains in force.  Court dates are now reestablished for late September and early October.

September 2011: 

Father files three separate emergency requests within the Massachusetts Probate system, requesting that visitation be restored.   My attorney informs me that it is highly unusual that the judges would not hear these emergency requests, and it is more unusual that the judges appear to be talking to one another.

Probate Judge #1 denies the request.  (The first time the emergency request is denied)

Probate Judge #2 denies request. (The second time the emergency request is denied)

And finally, Judge Menno denies emergency request, indicating he will hear the request at next week’s hearing. (The third time the emergency request to restore visitation is denied)

Second day of trial in late September (the first day of Trial was in July), the judge suggests he will make a decision on the emergency request to restore father’s visitation after hearing Parenting Coordinator, Michele Dorsey, on the next court date. (The fourth time the emergency request is denied)

Father testifies second day of trial.

October 2011:

Third day of trial, Parenting Coordinator and Dr. Wolman testify…. Both recommend the same exact terms for father: supervised visitation and a suspension of the father’s rights, and that the father should go to therapy.  Michele Dorsey is not a trained mental health professional; and Dr. Wolman would appear to lack credibility given his failings as a GAL, his courtroom testimony, and poor guidance given to the mother, in regards conducting her own investigation.  Michele Dorsey, Judge Menno’s appointee, labors on the witness stand, her face is scarlet, and she cannot remember many things, despite being a mediator for the last five years.  Father believes Michele Dorsey makes many misstatements on the witness stand.

Judge Menno suggest that they will make ruling on the emergency order on the next trial date, after hearing Margaret Kenney. (The fifth time the emergency request to restore visitation is denied)

Fourth day of trial, Margaret Kenney testifies, and Judge now states that he will make a request on the emergency request to restore visitation by no later than November 9th.  (The sixth time the emergency request to restore visitation is denied).

(Author’s note: With all these delays in making a decision on the emergency order, could this have been due to Judge Menno having already made up his mind on his ruling, before the trial had even begun?)

The father through documentation illustrates throughout proceedings that the mother underfed child, so that he lost at least fifteen pounds in two separate incidents (as documented by Doctors Sousa and Stanley).  It was documented that the child missed 31 homework assignments (even though his mother is a school teacher), while under his mother’s care for the fifth grade.   It is freely acknowledged that he was locked out of his mother’s house, and that the mother is mean to the child (which she admits to on the witness stand), and the mother is a danger to household pets.  Chris is also poorly clothed in the winter months, and has been repeatedly tested again and again for learning disabilities. His stepbrother, per Chris, has been tested repeatedly for drugs, has anger management issues, and as acknowledged by the GAL has drawn swastikas on the basement walls and punched holes in the wall. It is acknowledged by the mother that Chris has fainted, or nearly fainted, at school (twice) and during mass in front of the congregation – so that medical attention was sought. Doctor Sousa attributes the fainting spells to lack of food. While in the mother’s care in Summer 2011, Chris has repeated suicidal thoughts.

The mother testifies on the witness stand the Chris is aware that his mother hates father, clear evidence of parental alienation.

Mother admits at the trial that Chris loves his father, is upset at not seeing his father, and is miserable. Moreover, there is no documented evidence providing by Team Margaret showing parenting alienation on the part of father. Nor has father ever been convicted of a crime, been to rehab or tested positively for drugs.

And yet, Judge Menno does nothing.

November 2011:

Judge does not rule on interim order for restoration of visitation on 11-9-11, as he committed to doing.  (This is the seventh time the emergency request to restore visitation is denied.)

My attorney, after stating she would do everything in her power to restore visitation by 11-9, and after she filed two emergency – interim orders, now states we must wait for final ruling.  Why?

November 9, 2011 all documents are into court, final argument and final pleadings, etc.

December 2011:

The judge, through his secretary, now says that he will make a comprehensive decision before Christmas. The secretary assures everyone that the judge is working very hard on the matter.

January 2012:

A decision signed 12-28-11 is received on 1-3-12.   The four-page decision took two and a half months to create; and the findings of fact released by Judge Menno are those proposed by Team Margaret, complete with typos, errors, known inconsistencies with documented evidence, and omissions.

Massachusetts’ Shakedown!

Posted: March 8, 2015 | Author: | Filed under: Doctor Levin, Doctor Wolman, Harbor Medical Associates, Jim Cantwell, Judge Menno, Margaret Kenney, Margaret Vannata | Leave a comment

Massachusetts’ Shakedown!

Clearly I made a mistake by marrying Margaret. But Chris was not a mistake and in fact is a gift from God. And Chris is by far the greatest person I have met in this world. My friends have often questioned me as to why I feel this way… maybe it’s because Chris taught me what real love is, which is unconditional. In my darker moments I feel that many people have taken advantage of me, because of my family ties for my son.

But that’s neither here nor there. At the end of the day, the question remains, why should Chris continue to suffer while under Margaret’s dysfunctional care.

As the following numbers show the Probate Industrial Complex had no problems helping themselves to my family’s assets… money, which could have been allocated to Chris’ future, had the Judge Menno’s Court functioned properly, or if the “professionals” involved in this case conducted themselves ethically, expeditiously, and appropriately.

But I guess there’s not much money in that is there?

However, when you are held to no ethical or professional standard by the State of Massachusetts, or by the judges overseeing their fellow cadres, abuse is sure to follow.

 

First Counsel  Jennifer Digregorio
2010
Fed $3,100.00
April $1,000.00
June $3,000.00
Sept $2,000.00
Nov $2,000.00
Dec $1,500.00
2011
March $1,200.00
April $1,000.00
May $1,250.00
June $2,000.00
July $1,000.00
July $10,000.00
July $7,000.00
October $2,000.00
October $5,000.00
December $1,500.00
Total $45,470.00
Second Counsel  Sandy Durland III
2010
Summer $6,000.00
2011
July $3,995.00
August $635.00
Total $10,630.00
Payment to Dr. Richard Wolman
2011
January $5,000.00
April $5,000.00
May $3,500.00
June $3,500.00
July $3,500.00
Total $20,500.00
Estimates Michele Dorsey  Attorney, Scituate, MA
Jan ’10 through August ’11 $8,470.00
Court Costs Ordered by Judge Menno
 State Rep. Cantwell $16,500.00
 Mr. Cantwell is the brother in law of Mr. Durland III (see above).
Total $101,570.00
Does not include therapy costs for my son, or the therapy ordered by the court.

 

 

The tragedy does not end with the money expended on this case. Margaret also receives child support payments of roughly $30,000 a year. This adds up to $360,000 after tax dollars I have ponied up. Last I checked Margaret had placed less than $10,000 in Chris’ college fund, and Chris often wears beat up clothing, or as we saw in winter 2011 seasonally inappropriate clothing.

So where does it all go?

It certainly isn’t spent upon Chris. So lets make that the final reform, the first $5,000 of any and all child support payments, annually, must go to the child’s college fund.

A Stain on Massachusetts

Posted: December 23, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Doctor John L. Stanley, Doctor Levin, Doctor Wolman, Jim Cantwell, Judge Menno, Margaret Kenney, Michele Dorsey, Mrs. Marshfield, Safe Harbor Mediation | 1 Comment

A Stain on Massachusetts

Or the Top Fifty Lessons Learned from Plymouth County Probate… 

“In general, the powerful and influential in our society shape the laws and have great influence on the legislature or the Congress.  This creates a reluctance to change because the powerful and the influential have carved out for themselves or have inherited a privileged position in our society, of wealth and social prominence or higher education or opportunity for the future.  What can we still do to restore equity and justice or to preserve it or to enhance it in this society?”    

–  Governor Jimmy Carter, May 4th 1974 – Law Day Address, University of Georgia

By J.M. Hamilton  12-25-13

After a thirteen year child custody battle, and more than a half million spent on legal fees and child support, here’s what I have learned about the Massachusetts Probate Courts (specifically in Plymouth County):

1)  If you nine year old comes to you and asks if you, ” Is mommy  trying to kill me (?),” if you’re a caring father, your life is about to be turned upside down.

2)  Further supporting the medical evidence showing inexplicable weight loss, your son can  black out in front of the school twice, and in front of an entire church congregation as an Altar Boy, due to lack of proper nutrition, and the Judge won’t do a damn thing.

3)  A mother can underfeed her nine year old, as documented by medical records, to the tune of fifteen pounds, and she will not be held accountable by the Plymouth County Probate courts, particularly Judge Menno.

4)  A mother can lock her son out of her home, at least three times that I’m aware of, and she will not be held accountable by the Plymouth County Probate courts (aka Judge Menno).

5)  A mother can under-cloth her son, so that he is sick for six consecutive weeks in the dead of a Massachusetts winter, and the Plymouth County Probate Courts will not grant a change in custody.

6)  You can present pictures of yours son’s bleeding hands, as a result of exposure, and the professionals and the judge will dismiss the evidence as a “rash.”

7)  The mother can abuse pets and animals, and in some instances make them disappear over the course of a weekend, and the Court appointed psychiatrist, Dr. Wolman (Boston), will dismiss this, as “improbable.”

8)  Mom can remarry, and bring into your son’s life a stepson, who abuses your son, beats on him, and has a rap sheet on Google the length of your arm, and the Plymouth County Probate court doesn’t care.

8.3)  Mom can call your son an “idiot” and “hyper, “and drag him from professional doctor to psychiatrist in the effort to have him diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, or the childhood disorder de jour – Autism, all throughout your son’s elementary school years (with every doctor repeating that there is ‘not a problem’); and when your son turns out to  be the straight A student – in his middle school years-  you maintained your son would always be, the Judge Menno will give your Ex full credit.

8.5)  If you think your Ex has Munchhausens syndrome, because she squanders $33,000 in child support on attorneys and doctors -annually, and your son asks you why he is “poor,” you are probably right, she does have Munchhausens.

8.7)  If your son misses thirty-one homework assignments, and your Ex might be a teacher within the Marshfield school district, the school administration, and the Plymouth County probate Judge Menno will give mommy a passing grade.

9)  Your son can be suicidal, under the care of his mother, for the duration of an entire Summer, and the Plymouth County Probate court will NOT grant a change of custody, but they’ll blame the father.

10)  If your Ex is smart, she’ll hire the local State Rep, Jim Cantwell, who has come out of retirement from his law practice, to represent her.

11)  It will be painfully clear to everyone in the courtroom why the State Rep. Jim Cantwell retired from the practice of law, and went into the politics; and yet, he will prevail because cronyism, politics and corruption trumps the rule of law and prima facie evidence in Plymouth County, Massachusetts.

12)  A prominent Boston attorney, Sandy Durland III, told me that my Ex had underfed my son, by sending him to bed without dinner – over the span of weeks.

13)  Judge Menno will see to it that only long established “friends/cronies” of the court are appointed to the key roles of parenting coordinator and guardian ad litem (i.e. court appointed investigator).

14)  The courtroom proceedings are a charade, the real decision making goes on in the star chamber within the judge’s office.

15)  A “parenting coordinator,” Attorney Michele Dorsey (Scituate MA), is a surrogate for the court, and has the “ex-officio” powers of a judge, w/out being required to practice the rule of law or due process.  Avoid the hiring of a parenting coordinator at all costs.

16)  If there is an obvious conflict of interest and you have signed a mediation agreement with a Plymouth County attorney, and this same attorney, Michele Dorsey (Scituate, MA) is dispensing legal advice to the mother in this case….. the Plymouth County probate judge, Menno, will still appoint this same attorney as a surrogate to his court, and assign her to be a “parenting coordinator.”

17)  When you point out the obvious ethical issues of the Judge’s parenting coordinator appointment to the Massachusetts Bar, they will side with the Judge Menno’s decision; that is to say, your Ex’s attorney/mediator/court appointed parenting coordinator, Michele Dorsey.

18)  If the parenting coordinator divides the payment of her fees in a disproportionate manner, say 70% father/30% mother…. BEWARE!   Your former spouse has absolutely no incentive to work things out with you; but rather, has every incentive to drag you before the parenting coordinator on every single issue, monthly.

19)  The parenting coordinator (PC), Michele Dorsey (Scituate MA) will not rein this behavior in, because after all, she is being paid, every time your Ex drags you into another meeting with her.

20)  You and your son are “scrod,” when the parenting coordinator is meeting with your Ex on the side, via phone and personal meetings.  Ignore the fact – at your peril – that you are being charged for these meetings, which you are not a part of, and when you ask for information or records concerning these meetings – you are denied.

21)  The divorce rates in the country is 50% for first time marriages and higher for second marriages.  If you have children, there is a higher probability than not that your divorce will not be amicable and that you will end up going through a probate court.

22)  Probate courts have some of the broadest powers of any other court in the land, that is to say, discretionary, arbitrary, and capricious power. These probate court powers are inimical to the rule of law and are likely unconstitutional, as they deprive persons of property, liberty, and the right to freely associate with family.

23)  Family law attorneys do not work on Fridays, and they take off the month of August, along with the Plymouth County Probate Court – Judge Menno – even if your son is suicidal while under his mother’s care.

24)  If you are looking for a Hollywood ending to your court room proceedings, where truth and facts triumph over local politics and cronyism, particularly in Plymouth County, Massachusetts, well… forget about it.

25)  When you report your Ex to DCF – the Marshfield Independent School District Principal, Mrs. Hubbard, will lie and cover up for your Ex, even though you’ve just been chewed out by this same school administration because your son missed 31 homework assignments, and are told your son is having a terrible year – while under mommy’s care.

26)  When you tell the District school Superintendent, Mr. Scott Borstel, that the principal lied to DCF – the Superintendent will “conduct an investigation” and tell you it was okay that she lied.

27). The GAL, Dr. Wolman (Boston), or court appointed investigator, can admit on the witness stand that he did not do his job and investigate the case, and the Plymouth County Probate Judge will just smile.

28). The GAL, Dr. Wolman, will threaten your son if he asks to live with his father.

29). The GAL, Dr. Wolman (Boston) will tell the mother it is okay for her to conduct her own personal investigation on the father’s property in the middle of a trial.

30). The GAL, Dr. Richard Wolman (Boston), will lie about his investigative instructions to your Ex on the witness stand, only to admit to it in subsequent testimony, and the judge will still deem him to be a competent and credible witness.

31). Despite all the horrific acts your Ex has committed against your son, the GAL will say the key point in the trial is when you filed a restraining order against the mother for conducting an investigation on your property.

32). Everyone acknowledges the obvious double-standard: that had I conducted an investigation on mother’s property I would be arrested or worse, shot.

33).  Your son’s doctor in Pembroke, MA, Dr. Stanley, can lie about your son’s weight loss, alter medical records, and the Massachusetts board of medicine will not hold your son’s doctor accountable.  This Dr. Stanley will lie and say your son must have had “rocks in his pockets” to account for the fifteen pound weight loss.

34). When any of the professionals involved in this case say they are looking out for the interests of your son, you know some highly self-serving SH!T is about to come down.

35). The stated goal of he State Rep, Jim Cantwell, was to drag these proceedings out for three years -completely contrary to the interests of my son, and against the ethical rules governing attorneys in the State of Massachusetts.

36). After four years in the Plymouth County probate court, I’m completely convinced the goal of the probate Judge Menno was to keep you tied up in his courtroom so that you generate fees for the local counsel, therapist and psychiatrist.

37). The Psychiatric profession is under fire in this country as President Obama’s appointee – and the lead psychiatrist – has pointed out that the profession and the DSM is not backed by science or biology.  In short, the profession is a fraud.

38). If you witness child abuse and the beating of children at a scouting event in Marshfield , MA — don’t report it to the parenting coordinator, Michele Dorsey, Judge Menno, the Boy Scouts, or the GAL, Dr. Wolman (Boston) because they will not investigate it and you will pay the price for reporting same.

39). Doctors, lawyers, teachers, parenting coordinators, mediators, school principals…. Apparently, nobody is a “mandated court reporter” in Plymouth County, w/ no obligation to report child abuse.

40). Some Marshfield parents still believe it is acceptable to hit, beat and strangle their children.

41). When I found out my son was suicidal under the care of his mother, and the professionals in this case continued to do nothing, I published a blog about my experiences with the Plymouth County Probate court.

42). After the trial was over, I wrote a book entitled Mrs. Marshfield, which was written largely based upon actual court room testimony and court room evidence.  I believe the book should be required reading for any parents with children, considering divorce, or any parents considering having children within the institution of marriage.

43) Judge Menno ruled that I had a first amendment right to publish the book; however, as he deemed the book to be harmful to my son – he suspended visitation for over a year.

44). To date, no medical or psychiatric evidence has been presented that my son ever saw the book or was in any way harmed by the book.  In fact my son is thriving and a straight A student…. exactly as I foretold.

45). The parties enraged by the book, Mrs. Marshfield, are the cadre of “professionals” who make up the probate industrial complex; that is to say, the star chamber.

46). In Fall 2013, the judge also reasoned that since I did not continue to litigate in his courtroom, I did not deserve to see my son.  The definition of insanity is for my family to attempt and continue to litigate in Plymouth County Probate.

47). Judge Menno conveniently forgot that my State Senator had requested that this same judge, Menno, be investigated, which resulted in an investigation spanning over six months, and I had asked the judge to recuse himself.

48). The evidence and statement of facts would suggest that Judge Menno just made up his decision- w/out regard to the facts or evidence presented in this case.

49). The same prominent Boston attorney, Mr. Sandy Durland III, who told me that my Ex systematically underfed my son, also told me that the judge in this case used to be competent but that he now took shortcuts with the law to reach his desired outcome.  This prominent Boston attorney is the brother in law of the State Rep, Jim Cantwell, who represented my Ex.  I guess he would know.

50). The behavior of Judge Menno and the professionals in this case is arguably criminal, likely unconstitutional; but like some of the more unsavory actions and recent revelations of the NSA, may be possibly legal and permitted by law.  At least for now.
Back in 1974, Jimmy Carter, then Governor Carter, gave a famous speech at the University of Georgia attacking our corrupt legal system, dominated by legal elites, the rich and the powerful.  Today, little has changed and it probably has grown worse.  Lady justice has lifted her blindfold, and with a wink and a nod, her scales of justice have been piled high with loot and tilted in favor of the elite and backroom/crony dealings.  The two trials that I have been a part of in Plymouth County were little more than playacting.

The majority of our judges are not elected in this country but are appointed for life, which essentially means their power is nearly absolute.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely, just as we saw in this case.  And the war of attrition and endless delays-that is often the core strategy of our modern day courts- perverts justice at every turn.  That, and it is widely known that justice is all too often for sale in this country.

“Justice delayed is justice denied.”  Mr. Gladstone told us that.

Our family law courts damage, and in some instances, destroy young lives, as many lawyers and many professionals play their games and take money away from families that can ill afford to pay or play their game.  The Plymouth County Probate court is a stain on the State of Massachusetts, and state bureaus and boards responsible for overseeing the “professionals” further damage the state’s reputation.  I believe there is a special place in hell for medical and psychiatric professionals, teachers and judges who abuse, and/or aid and abet, the manipulation of children.  It’s the tenth ring of hell or Plymouth County Probate by any other name.

Ultimately, as we live in a democracy – Americans get the government we deserve; that is to say, as long as we tolerate tenured judges and politicians, a crony system of elites running our courts and government for their own personal enrichment – U.S. citizens should expect to be preyed upon and sustain continued injustice on a monumental scale…. especially at the expense of our children.

As for myself, I have never missed a support payment, never missed a scheduled visitation, remained gainfully employed for in excess of thirty years, have no criminal record, and have never entered rehab for the abuse of drugs; and I am eminently better able to provide and afford a better life and care for my son, than the current circumstances my son finds himself consigned to.

While I am not going to publish the names of the individuals involved in this case – for fear of the continued abuse of power and reprisals against me and my son – I am publishing the docket numbers, which are a matter of public record.  Perhaps some enterprising reporter, or lawyer or a politician with a conscience, would like to take a look at the corruption within the Plymouth County Probate court?

Should you visit Plymouth County, please give the judges my regards.

 
 
Docket Number:  PL02D 1047-DR
Docket Number:  PL02D 1047-FM1