In many ways this is a typical custodial father story. Dad ROBERT HARDIN outlawyers Mom, buries her in unfounded child abuse allegations, moves out of state, denies Mom all contact. Mom can't even get legal help.
Notice that there are hints of wife abuse as well.
And of course, Daddy isn't interested in parenting. He's only interested in hurting Mom--just as he told her at the outset of his custodial war. And then what does Daddy do after he gets custody? He promptly moves out of state with no warning, then HE moves out of the country and dumps the girl on wife #2, that even HE claims was unstable and violent.
If moms are responsible for violent boyfriends and the like--even when they are being battered themselves--then surely this dude is responsible as well. But as very often happens, fathers are virtually never held accountable for failure to protect.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/19/they-ran-my-little-girl-to-death.html?source=TDB&via=FB_Page
03.19.15
They Ran My Little Girl to Death
Heather Walker's daughter, Savannah, died after her grandmother and stepmother allegedly forced her to run laps until she collapsed.
Heather Walker thought she had finally reached the end of a grueling three-year custody battle for her 9-year-old daughter, Savannah Hardin. But the next time she saw Savannah, the little girl was in a coma after allegedly being forced to run laps for hours as a punishment for eating candy bars.
Now, Savannah’s grandmother Joyce Hardin Garrard is on trial for capital murder in connection with Savannah’s death, and the girl’s stepmother, Jessica Hardin, has been charged with murder for allegedly failing to intervene when Savannah pleaded for help.
Walker, who declined to speak publicly about the tragedy for three years, told her story in an exclusive interview with The Daily Beast.
Heather Walker sat beside 9-year-old Savannah in a Birmingham children’s hospital on February 19, 2012. Savannah's mop of blond hair had been pulled into a tight ponytail on the top of her head, and it looked as if she was just sleeping.
Heather wiped the blood off Savannah’s face and hands with a warm cloth and thought how big the little girl had gotten in the two years since she’d seen her last.
She didn’t know if Savannah could hear her—she had learned in radiology school that doctors don’t really know how sentient the brain of a coma patient really is—but there were so many things Heather wanted to say to her daughter, and so many questions she’d wanted to ask. So Heather just talked like Savannah was there with her, though part of her knew that this was her last chance to tell her daughter anything again.
What was daily life like for Savannah? Was she still cheerleading like she had been at home? How was she doing in school? Did she have pets at her new house? Had she received any of the packages Heather had been sending? Did she know Heather had been fighting for her, that she didn’t just give her away?
“I just want you to know that mommy fought for you and never gave up on you,” Heather told her. “I love you with all of my heart,” Heather said, making the secret circle with her hands that she and Savannah had done back and forth so many times.
A tear ran down Savannah’s face.
Maybe it didn’t mean anything. A nurse said it was just a nerve, a reflex, and maybe she was right.
But for Heather, it was goodbye. And she felt Savannah let go.
***
What happened to Savannah?
According to doctors, Savannah had suffered from seizures triggered by low sodium, brought on by “prolonged physical exertion.”
Savannah’s grandmother, 49-year-old Joyce Hardin Garrard, had taken Savannah to the hospital. She told Heather that Savannah was practicing for a race at school. “She keeps coming in second place,” Heather says Garrard told her. “So we were outside practicing in the yard and I don’t know what happened.”
Neighbors testified they thought the punishment would stop when they saw Savannah down on all fours, vomiting in the yard.
When Heather heard Garrard telling the seizure story to her sister, the details had changed: Now Savannah had tripped and fallen.
“Joyce’s story kept changing. Nothing was consistent,” Heather says. (A paramedic, a school counselor, and an investigator would all later say that Garrard had changed her story with them as well.)
When Heather finally arrived at the Birmingham Children’s Hospital—after 12 hours of travel, where the doctor’s “Ma’am, how soon can you get here?” echoed in her brain—she says it was Joyce who tried to stop her from seeing Savannah. Heather says she walked into the ICU as Joyce shouted behind her to the nurses, “Don’t you let her in there with that baby alone!”
When Joyce finally agreed to let Heather see her daughter, she told her that she would only be able to sit a minute, that she would have to switch with her and Jessica Hardin, Savannah’s stepmother. “And don’t be touching her a lot,” Heather says Joyce said when she hugged Savannah.
“When you looked at Joyce you didn’t see an upset person. There was just…nothing,” Heather says of her ex-mother-in-law’s demeanor. After they had taken Savannah off the breathing machines, Heather says, Joyce started to panic.
“She pinned Jessica up against the side of the hospital wall. She was staring into her eyes and telling her in a low stern voice, ‘Listen here, you need to pull it together. Do you understand what I’m trying to tell you? There’s a lot on the line here.’”
“And I knew something wasn’t right,” Heather says.
***
Savannah’s grandmother had reason to worry.
Both she and Jessica Hardin would be arrested the next day on charges of murder for Savannah’s death. Joyce Garrard currently is on trial in Alabama facing capital murder charges. She maintains her innocence, but if found guilty, she could receive a death sentence or life without parole.
According to investigators, on the afternoon of February 17, 2012, Garrard—whom prosecutors have dubbed the “drill sergeant from hell”—forced little Savannah to run 50-foot sprints for close to three hours while carrying firewood the size of cinder blocks, until the girl collapsed from vomiting and dehydration. It was corporal punishment, officials say, for eating chocolate bars on the school bus and lying about it.
At Garrard’s trial, witnesses for the prosecution have testified about what went on during Savannah’s last hours.
A neighbor said he watched Savannah as she begged Garrard to stop.
“Keep running,” Garrard replied. “I didn’t tell you you could stop.” When Savannah pleaded for her stepmother, Jessica Hardin, to stop the punishment, Garrard reportedly said, “‘Don't look at her. She won’t help you.”
It seems Garrard was right. Officials say Savannah’s mother and father were miles away and Savannah’s stepmother (who has also been charged with murder for failing to intervene), her neighbors, and the bus driver who all watched as the punishment was taking place, did nothing to stop it.
A surveillance video taken from the bus Savannah rode to school captured a conversation between bus driver Raeanna Holmes and Garrard. On it, Garrard tells the driver, “She’s going to run until I tell her to stop.”
“She’s going to learn,” Garrard said.
Savannah ran until she couldn’t anymore. Neighbors testified they thought the punishment would stop when they saw Savannah down on all fours, vomiting in the yard. Garrard was pouring water in her mouth. Eventually Savannah just collapsed and her stepmother finally called 911.
When an ambulance arrived, medics found the 75-pound girl in panties and a T-shirt, passed out on the lawn, freezing and soaked to the bone, a wet blanket laid on top of her. Cuts from the firewood lined Savannah’s arms.
***
When a child suffers such a horrific ordeal, the natural question follows: Where were her parents? In Savannah’s case the answer is simple: Her mother was in Florida, her father overseas working as a civilian contractor. The “why” behind Savannah’s separation from her mother is much more complicated.
Robert and Heather Hardin got married young after getting pregnant with Savannah. Robert’s mother, Joyce Garrard, had arranged the shotgun wedding, Heather says. “In two weeks we planned to get married by a pastor I didn’t know, in a church I had never been to,” she says.
Robert joined the military and was gone for long stretches. Before long, the two had grown apart and by the time Savannah was 3 years old, her parents’ divorce was final and Heather had moved with her daughter to Plant City, Florida. The divorce wasn’t amicable. As Heather boarded the plane to Florida, she says Robert said, “I hate you and you’ll pay for this one day.”
But it was Robert who started paying, $200 a month in child support, and even when he moved to Jacksonville, Florida, in 2006, he didn’t see much of Savannah. By 2009, he was remarried, to Jessica Hardin, and had had another child, their son Gavin. According to Heather, his new family sparked a desire on Robert’s part to be a bigger part of Savannah’s life.
Heather says Robert started asking to take Savannah on the holidays and weekends. He would come to see her cheer at Little League games and the co-parenting arrangement was working well. Savannah went to visit her dad on spring break in 2009—but when Heather arrived at the usual exchange point in Daytona, she says Robert never showed. Heather says Robert was adamant: “I’m not giving her back,” he said.
Later that day, she got a call from an investigator at the Florida Department of Children and Families; Robert had charged her with abandonment, claiming that she had relinquished rights to their daughter by going on a weeklong trip to visit a boyfriend in Wyoming during Robert’s scheduled visit with Savannah. When she got home, a sheriff met her at the door with paperwork asking a judge to turn over full custody.
When Robert decided he wanted Savannah, he hired a lawyer and started an aggressive campaign to keep the child away from her mother. According to Florida Department of Children and Family records, Robert filed at least five complaints between 2009 and 2012. The state investigations found his accusations—from physical and mental abuse of Savannah to inhabitable living conditions—to be unfounded and each of the cases were closed. In one of the reports, an investigator said Savannah sounded as if she had been “coached” by her father.
On top of the constant DCF investigations, and a legal process that she had to make her way through without the help of a lawyer, Heather was laid off from her job as a catering truck delivery driver. She had been forced to move from her home and while she was waiting for her new job at a hardware store to start, she had to move into an ex-boyfriend’s home. Robert reported the man to the court for being a former felon. (An investigation found the boyfriend not to be a threat to Savannah’s well-being). Other reports were specifically aimed at Savannah’s babysitter, who subsequently refused to watch Savannah anymore, reportedly fearing for her own children’s safety.
“Robert took every avenue to make things more difficult for me,” Heather says.
They were going back and forth to court. Robert’s attorney filed petitions on his behalf while Heather went to the courthouse alone and sought out pro bono legal services, which would help her fill out forms, but wouldn’t give legal advice. One service could only help if she was a victim of domestic abuse, which she wasn’t.
“He had an attorney and I didn’t. He was in the military, and people look highly on that,” Heather says. “I was afraid that we would go to court and a judge would say, ‘Well, how do you think you’re going to take care of her?’ So I brought myself to terms with voluntarily letting her live there, against my better judgment, because if I thought if I don’t, the judge is probably going to take her anyway.”
And so the couple agreed that Savannah would temporarily move into her father’s Jacksonville home in September of 2009. A court-ordered parenting plan shows that Heather and Robert shared custody—school and medical decisions and the like would be made jointly—and Heather would visit with Savannah on designated weekends. Heather sent Savannah trinkets and treats in care packages and they would talk on the phone. In the meantime, Heather was going to school and working a new full-time job. Soon she moved into a little house with her 3-year-old son, Savannah’s younger half-brother.
Things looked like they were settling down. She would have Savannah back soon; that was the plan.
On Martin Luther King Day weekend 2010, Heather took Savannah to get pictures made at Walmart. Their birthdays were close together so they bought a cake, too. Savannah asked the woman behind the bakery counter to write, “Happy Birthday, Savannah and Mommy.”
“And that was the last birthday we ever shared together,” Heather says. “It was the last time I saw her outside of a hospital bed.”
Heather says Robert never told her that he was moving his family back to Alabama. When Savannah’s birthday package was returned to Heather’s address and Robert stopped answering his phone, Heather called Joyce Garrard, who told her that Savannah was at her home. Heather says she was allowed to speak to her only once, and Savannah told her they had moved into “Maw-maw’s house.” It was the last time she would be able to talk to her daughter.
What happened during the next two years that Savannah lived in Alabama with her father and stepmother is still something of a mystery to Heather. Robert was working as a civilian contractor overseas; a spokeswoman for the Etowah County Sheriff's office told the AP that Robert “lived outside the country,” leaving Jessica and Joyce to do the majority of the caregiving.
Still, the custody fight continued in Alabama. Robert filed for a petition to modify custody, an action that, if granted, would strip Heather of her parenting rights, reasoning he could “provide a more stable home” for Savannah. Heather answered in court documents that Robert was on “a crusade to keep Savannah away” from her.
She continued: “[Savannah] was doing well in school, enrolled in cheerleading, and was a well-rounded child. Since residing with Robert she is now in counseling and seeing therapists…I am extremely concerned for the welfare of Savannah as I am concerned that there may be things going on in their home that are the cause of the problem.”
Though Heather didn’t know it, she had reason to be concerned. At Joyce Garrard’s trial, Savannah’s pediatrician, Dr. Deborah Smith, cryptically testified that the relationship between Joyce, Savannah, and her stepmother Jessica "was not normal" and said she almost contacted authorities, but in the end didn't.
Meanwhile, Robert and Jessica had been going through a divorce and custody dispute as well.
Records show an environment far from stable. Robert’s divorce complaint charged Savannah’s stepmother with verbal and emotional abuse. He claimed she had a drinking problem and suffered from bipolar disorder that she refused to treat.
Jessica, in turn, filed for a restraining order against Robert in August 2010. In her petition, she said Robert had become physically and mentally abusive. He “pushed her against a wall and threw her on the couch” and threatened her. “Robert has said I will never be allowed to see my son and will do whatever it take to make sure of it,” the complaint says.
The following day, Robert filed an affidavit claiming Jessica was “not financially, mentally, or physically able to provide a safe environment for the child.”
Five months later, Robert and Jessica reconciled and asked a judge to dismiss their case.
Heather didn’t know any of this as she drove back and forth to Alabama half a dozen times between 2010 and 2011 to appear in court in her attempt to win Savannah back. She’d stop by Savannah’s new home but no one was ever there. She’d leave packages for Savannah on the porch but still doesn’t know if she ever received them. The Hardins changed their phone numbers so contact was impossible.
Robert never appeared in court for the custody hearings, Heather says. She says Robert’s lawyer explained his client’s absence by saying her ex-husband was working or training. The repeated motions for continuances were wearing on Heather and at their final court appearance in December 2011, Heather says Robert made new accusations that she was too mentally unstable to take care of Savannah. At every appearance, Heather says the judge would tell her the same thing: “You need to get an attorney.” That’s when she says she broke down in the judge’s chambers.
“I just need to see my daughter,” Heather says she told the judge. “I don’t have money for an attorney and I just need someone to tell me what to do. I’m not crazy, but if I was, it’s because he took my child away from me and hasn’t let me see or talk to her for two years.”
Finally she says—and court documents show—the judge told her, “Look. You need to go get a psychiatric evaluation and when it comes back the way I’m pretty sure it will, I will make up the time you’ve lost with your daughter.”
“We left that day and never made it to the next trial,” Heather says. “I did everything I knew to do, but in the end, everything I knew to do wasn’t enough.”
***
It’s been three years since Savannah’s death. The little girl who loved the color blue and horses should be in the sixth grade. Time hasn’t dulled Heather Walker's loss; the Florida mother has a 9-year-old, a 10-month-old, and two stepchildren with her new husband, who she met the weekend before Savannah’s death. Heather finished her radiology degree in 2011, but can’t bear to step foot in a hospital anymore, so she says she’s in a kind of limbo. She works two jobs in Florida while her husband is training to be an EMT.
Heather sometimes finds herself picking up trinkets at the store that Savannah would love before remembering there’s no way to send them to her. And she doesn’t know how to reply when people ask how many children she has—to say two feels like a betrayal of Savannah, to say three opens herself up to questions that are hard to answer.
And she’s keeping an eye on the trial in Alabama. Heather has been subpoenaed as a potential witness, but says prosecutors haven’t called her yet. She may go to Alabama for the verdict, but says the thought of seeing Joyce and listening to the closing statements where prosecutors will relive Savannah’s final moments may be too much to handle.
“I feel like she’s guilty,” Heather says. “It might not have been her intention, but ultimately it all falls on Joyce. As an adult and a parent and a grandparent, you should know when enough is enough. Even if Savannah really did do what they are saying she did, you don’t punish a child like that.”
Showing posts with label moveways. Show all posts
Showing posts with label moveways. Show all posts
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Custodial dad sentenced to 48 years for death of 3-year-old daughter (Sterling, Colorado)
You have to wade through a lot of verbage before you find out dad MARK WEEKS was custodial--and even then you have to deduce that fact (i.e. reference to step). Here we have a dad with a record of a previous violent felony (i.e. assault) and evidence of previous child abuse. Yet despite his "anger" problems, he got custody of a young girl anyway. No mention of what happened to the mother here--or in previous postings, except that she appears to live in California. See here.
http://dastardlydads.blogspot.com/2010/07/custodial-dad-step-arrested-in-death-of.html
Again, we have to ask the same questions that we raised in 2010. What California judge gave this abusive father with a criminal history of assault custody of a young girl? How did Dad get moveaway permission in a state that routinely denies these rights to mothers? Was Mom denied all visitation? Why? Especially since she's apparently not the homicidal one?
Notice that the authorities come up with one bland and totally ineffective solution: parental education. What we don't need is useless "education" targeting violent felons and child abusers. What we need is more education directed to the public so they know the abuses that the courts are committing in the public's name.
INVISIBLE MOTHER ALERT
http://www.journal-advocate.com/sterling-local_news/ci_19783550
Mark Weeks sentenced to 48 years for child abuse in Alexis McClain murder case
Will serve concurrent with life sentence on murder conviction
By Sara Waite Journal-Advocate managing editor
Posted: 01/20/2012 01:34:32 PM MST
STERLING -- Mark Weeks sat handcuffed and looking down at his lap through much of the sentencing hearing at Logan County District Court Thursday.
Weeks appeared before Judge Michael Singer to be sentenced on a charge of child abuse causing death related to the murder of his 3-year-old daughter, Alexis McClain. After a request for a change in venue by the defense, Weeks was convicted by a Morgan County jury on that count and a primary charge of first degree murder of a victim under 12 by one in a position of trust on Nov. 8, 2011. The mandatory sentence of life without parole was imposed immediately, but there were some questions to be answered before sentencing on the second count could be done.Weeks returned to Logan County Court for that sentencing because Singer had only granted a change in venue for the trial itself, not for the entire case.
In court Thursday, the defense team of public defenders Damon Brune and Thomas Ward was offered the first opportunity to enter an argument on the sentencing but declined.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Brittny Lewton, representing the People of Colorado, argued that while the law requires that charges related to the same crime against the same victim require a concurrent sentence, she felt the evidence in the case proved that there had been distinct acts that would warrant a consecutive sentence. She cited testimony of prior abuse and evidence of past injuries, saying "the act that killed (Alexis) was separate, or perhaps a culmination, of all the other acts."
Lewton also noted in her argument that the case had been a difficult and emotional one for all involved. She said it involved the most "dismaying and disgusting set of facts" many of the investigators and legal team had ever seen. However, she said, Weeks never showed any signs that he felt remorse, during any phase of the investigation or trial. She said if there had been any doubt about his role in Alexis's death, it was cleared up by his lack of emotion, even when autopsy photos of the child were displayed in court.
"We hope he suffers every day," she told the judge. "There is never going to be a punishment that is good enough."
She offered praise to those who were involved in the case, saying they all gave " the best fight we could have put forward" from the day in July 2010 that the Logan County Sheriff's Office began investigating the allegation of child abuse and the toddler's death. She said the professionalism demonstrated on the case showed that the justice system works.
She also noted that the DA's Office is tasked to represent the state -- not the victim, "We do give voice to those who have none."
"That child, when she died at the hands of her father -- that was a gift to her," setting her free from the torture and abuse that she had experienced, Lewton said.
The defense offered no rebuttal to the argument, and Weeks declined the opportunity to address the court before Singer handed down his decision.
Singer cited case law and questioned whether there were distinct enough acts to impost a consecutive sentence. He noted that the Colorado legislature has made it clear that courts should maximize the intent of a jury's verdict. However, he felt the jury was given the task of weighing two different theories on the same incident. The jury rejected the idea that Alexis's step-mother, Ginger Weeks, who pled guilty to a reduced charge in exchange for testifying against her husband, was the only guilty party or that the death was an accident, and found Mark Weeks guilty on both, Singer said.
Singer said the evidence made it clear that Alexis died of blunt force trauma, but what exactly happened on the morning of July 8, 2010, is a mystery that may never be made clear. The evidence presented showed a pattern of conduct of abuse, as Alexis's body had a number of bruises of varying ages, and signs that she was healing from a broken rib. However, the cause of death was same, and he felt it required a concurrent sentence.
"If I could impose a consecutive sentence, I would do so," Singer said.
The circumstances of the case, as well as a 2005 assault conviction in which Weeks apparently was involved in an unprovoked fight in California, led Singer to issue an aggravated sentence. He said it was evident that Weeks has no control over his anger and was unable to cope with the challenge of caring for a 3 year old.
"Nothing the court does today can satisfy Alexis's interests," he said before handing down a sentence of 48 years, with five years of mandatory parole.
He addressed Weeks, saying, "I hope before you meet your maker you find out who you are... and beg to make amends."
Lewton said today that she wasn't surprised at the judge's decision that Weeks would serve concurrent sentences, and that the system had done the best it could. The important thing, she said, was that Weeks will "never hurt anybody again."
The case was "really, really sad," Lewton said, and while she's glad it's over, she can't be happy because of the circumstances surrounding it.
She said one message that was made clear through the course of the case was that there is a need for parenting education. There's not one right way to raise a child, she said, but "All parents struggle," and need to know how to react to challenges like potty-training issues and other frustrations
http://dastardlydads.blogspot.com/2010/07/custodial-dad-step-arrested-in-death-of.html
Again, we have to ask the same questions that we raised in 2010. What California judge gave this abusive father with a criminal history of assault custody of a young girl? How did Dad get moveaway permission in a state that routinely denies these rights to mothers? Was Mom denied all visitation? Why? Especially since she's apparently not the homicidal one?
Notice that the authorities come up with one bland and totally ineffective solution: parental education. What we don't need is useless "education" targeting violent felons and child abusers. What we need is more education directed to the public so they know the abuses that the courts are committing in the public's name.
INVISIBLE MOTHER ALERT
http://www.journal-advocate.com/sterling-local_news/ci_19783550
Mark Weeks sentenced to 48 years for child abuse in Alexis McClain murder case
Will serve concurrent with life sentence on murder conviction
By Sara Waite Journal-Advocate managing editor
Posted: 01/20/2012 01:34:32 PM MST
STERLING -- Mark Weeks sat handcuffed and looking down at his lap through much of the sentencing hearing at Logan County District Court Thursday.
Weeks appeared before Judge Michael Singer to be sentenced on a charge of child abuse causing death related to the murder of his 3-year-old daughter, Alexis McClain. After a request for a change in venue by the defense, Weeks was convicted by a Morgan County jury on that count and a primary charge of first degree murder of a victim under 12 by one in a position of trust on Nov. 8, 2011. The mandatory sentence of life without parole was imposed immediately, but there were some questions to be answered before sentencing on the second count could be done.Weeks returned to Logan County Court for that sentencing because Singer had only granted a change in venue for the trial itself, not for the entire case.
In court Thursday, the defense team of public defenders Damon Brune and Thomas Ward was offered the first opportunity to enter an argument on the sentencing but declined.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Brittny Lewton, representing the People of Colorado, argued that while the law requires that charges related to the same crime against the same victim require a concurrent sentence, she felt the evidence in the case proved that there had been distinct acts that would warrant a consecutive sentence. She cited testimony of prior abuse and evidence of past injuries, saying "the act that killed (Alexis) was separate, or perhaps a culmination, of all the other acts."
Lewton also noted in her argument that the case had been a difficult and emotional one for all involved. She said it involved the most "dismaying and disgusting set of facts" many of the investigators and legal team had ever seen. However, she said, Weeks never showed any signs that he felt remorse, during any phase of the investigation or trial. She said if there had been any doubt about his role in Alexis's death, it was cleared up by his lack of emotion, even when autopsy photos of the child were displayed in court.
"We hope he suffers every day," she told the judge. "There is never going to be a punishment that is good enough."
She offered praise to those who were involved in the case, saying they all gave " the best fight we could have put forward" from the day in July 2010 that the Logan County Sheriff's Office began investigating the allegation of child abuse and the toddler's death. She said the professionalism demonstrated on the case showed that the justice system works.
She also noted that the DA's Office is tasked to represent the state -- not the victim, "We do give voice to those who have none."
"That child, when she died at the hands of her father -- that was a gift to her," setting her free from the torture and abuse that she had experienced, Lewton said.
The defense offered no rebuttal to the argument, and Weeks declined the opportunity to address the court before Singer handed down his decision.
Singer cited case law and questioned whether there were distinct enough acts to impost a consecutive sentence. He noted that the Colorado legislature has made it clear that courts should maximize the intent of a jury's verdict. However, he felt the jury was given the task of weighing two different theories on the same incident. The jury rejected the idea that Alexis's step-mother, Ginger Weeks, who pled guilty to a reduced charge in exchange for testifying against her husband, was the only guilty party or that the death was an accident, and found Mark Weeks guilty on both, Singer said.
Singer said the evidence made it clear that Alexis died of blunt force trauma, but what exactly happened on the morning of July 8, 2010, is a mystery that may never be made clear. The evidence presented showed a pattern of conduct of abuse, as Alexis's body had a number of bruises of varying ages, and signs that she was healing from a broken rib. However, the cause of death was same, and he felt it required a concurrent sentence.
"If I could impose a consecutive sentence, I would do so," Singer said.
The circumstances of the case, as well as a 2005 assault conviction in which Weeks apparently was involved in an unprovoked fight in California, led Singer to issue an aggravated sentence. He said it was evident that Weeks has no control over his anger and was unable to cope with the challenge of caring for a 3 year old.
"Nothing the court does today can satisfy Alexis's interests," he said before handing down a sentence of 48 years, with five years of mandatory parole.
He addressed Weeks, saying, "I hope before you meet your maker you find out who you are... and beg to make amends."
Lewton said today that she wasn't surprised at the judge's decision that Weeks would serve concurrent sentences, and that the system had done the best it could. The important thing, she said, was that Weeks will "never hurt anybody again."
The case was "really, really sad," Lewton said, and while she's glad it's over, she can't be happy because of the circumstances surrounding it.
She said one message that was made clear through the course of the case was that there is a need for parenting education. There's not one right way to raise a child, she said, but "All parents struggle," and need to know how to react to challenges like potty-training issues and other frustrations
Saturday, December 17, 2011
System fails mom; dad with history of DV gets visitation rights, murders mom during child pickup (Old Bridge, New Jersey)
This was no mysterious "tragedy" with a "perfect couple." That's just the same old bullcrap that's attached to all these cases, and it only works for stupid people in denial. The facts: dad ANTHONY TRAPP had a long history of domestic violence. And Mom's efforts to get obtain safety for herself and her children through the legal system were totally stymied . So now Mom is dead, and two young children are left motherless and traumatized by senseless Daddy Drama.
Who was judge who refused to let Mom relocate?
Was it the same judge who refused her an order of protection 3 TIMES?
Was it the same judge who gave this violent batterer visitation rights?
Because, Daddy got them. So much for daddies being discriminated against, eh? And as it turned out, Trapp slaughtered Mom when she arrrived to pick up the kids. This is not the first time a mom has been slaughtered by a violent father who was granted visitation/custodial rights. This is the not the first time a mother has been put in harm's way during child pickups and drop offs. It's not even the first case of a mother being murdered during a child pickup and dropoff. And yet these father-friendly judges continue this practice without one iota of concern for the safety and well-being of women and children. It's only about what Daddy Demands--thanks to the victory of the fathers rights movement.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/old_bridge_murder-suicide_was.html
Tragedy was waiting to erupt, friends and family say of Old Bridge couple slain in murder-suicide
Published: Saturday, December 17, 2011, 7:00 AM
Updated: Saturday, December 17, 2011, 10:45 PM
By Star-Ledger Staff
OLD BRIDGE — They appeared to be the perfect suburban couple, smiling for the camera on their tree-lined street in Old Bridge three years ago as they hugged their 2-year-old daughter dressed up like Minnie Mouse for Halloween.
"Great family pic ..." a friend commented on Facebook.
But interviews with friends and neighbors, as well as court records, show that beneath the smiles and away from the cameras, things were far different for Anthony and Heather Trapp.
They had a volatile and violent relationship that prompted Heather Trapp to twice file for divorce, obtain three restraining orders against her husband and attempt to return to her mother’s home on Staten Island, only to be rebuffed by a judge.
Heather Trapp, 37, was found dead Thursday evening inside the Rose Lane home the couple had shared until about about four months ago. She had been stabbed multiple times, authorities said Friday, allegedly by her husband who then abducted their daughters and fled north.
Early Friday, Anthony Trapp, 39, and his daughters were located at a hotel in Fort Montgomery, N.Y., 80 miles from Old Bridge.
The girls were unharmed when they were coaxed out of the open door of their father’s room around 7:30 a.m. by some of the dozens of New York state troopers who had surrounded the five-room motel. Their father was later found dead inside the room.
Police believe he had already killed himself when Emma, now 5, the toddler wearing the mouse ears and polka dot dress in the Halloween photo, opened the door, New York State Police Maj. Ed Raso said.
"We were able to motion to her, and she came out," followed moments later by her 20-month-old sister, Sophia, he said.
Members of the state police special operations team scooped them up, wrapped them in blankets and carried them to safety before they were placed in the temporary custody of relatives.
Police then spent more than an hour trying to communicate with Trapp by phone and bullhorn. At 8:40, troopers entered the room and found Trapp, 39, dead on a bed, Capt. Joseph Tripodo said.
Authorities said he apparently killed himself; they didn’t release details but said he didn’t shoot himself. An autopsy is scheduled for today.
A MOTHER'S CONCERN
Over the past few months, Heather Trapp’s mother told friends she feared for her daughter’s safety.
"He is sick in the head ... I don’t know what to do," Fran Newman, Heather’s mother, said in August, according to Lorraine Gerbino, a lifelong friend. "I’m scared for my daughter. Pray for her.
"... She knew he was going to kill her — and so did Heather," Gerbino said Friday, breaking down in tears. "Heather said to friends he was going to kill her, and he did."
Few people in Middlesex County took the threats seriously, Newman told friends.
"I guess my daughter would have to be killed for someone to say, ‘Oh, I guess she was right,’" she said in one e-mail to Gerbino.
In another, she wrote, "The laws in Middlesex County are not great for domestic violence. I don’t want my daughter to be a statistic."
Unlimited Exposures
Heather and Anthony Trapp were married in October 2004.
The couple married on Oct. 8, 2004, in Livingston, and separated at least six months before Heather Trapp filed for divorce on Aug. 23, citing irreconcilable differences, court records show.
In her petition, she sought joint legal custody of the two girls, alimony and child support, court records show. She also noted that three restraining orders were filed against her husband this year — the first on March 28 and the others on Aug. 18 — but all were dismissed.
Public records show the Trapps purchased their home on Rose Lane in Old Bridge in August 2004, two months before they married. Heather lived there until August, when she moved to a townhouse on Pendleton Place in Old Bridge, about 3 1/2 miles away.
Heather Trapp was a licensed dental hygienist in Florida, New Jersey and New York. A slight woman with a vibrant personality, she dazzled patients with her ability to always remember a face, friends said. She beamed when talking about her daughters.
But according to co-workers, she lived in fear of her 6-foot, 4-inch husband.
"She was very, very afraid," said Elizabeth Klein, a hygienist in the Old Bridge dental office where Heather Trapp worked part time.
Klein said the Trapps’ marriage had been rocky for years. Several years ago, she said, the couple sought counseling and were urged to resolved their problems. The physical abuse became worse after Anthony Trapp became ill and lost his job, Klein said.
Police said Anthony Trapp had visitation of his daughters on Thursday and when his estranged wife when to pick them up, he attacked her.
After not hearing from her and concerned about Heather Trapp’s safety, a relative phoned police at 8:55 p.m. Thursday. Police arrived at the Rose Lane home and found her dead in the kitchen. She had been stabbed multiple times, authorities said.
Police issued an Amber Alert for the two girls and eventually traced them and their father to the motel in Orange County, N.Y.
"I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE THIS"
Anthony Dalessio and his family live across the street from the Trapp home on Rose Lane, and said he and his wife were Heather’s "best friends in the neighborhood," but acknowledged the couple was "definitely having problems."
The Dalessios were at a Christmas party Thursday night when they got calls that police cars were everywhere in the neighborhood, he said.
"I can’t even imagine something like this," Dalessio said. "I’ve been up all night.
"She would do anything for her children," Dalessio said of Heather Trapp. "Thank God they’re safe. Now we have to grieve one of our best friends."
Anthony Trapp had been out of work since December 2009, when he was fired from his job at Societe Generale Americas Securities, where he had worked as a senior auditor for three years.
Trapp filed suit against the company, claiming he was unlawfully fired and discriminated against because of an ongoing disability, according to court papers. Trapp said he was diagnosed in 2008 with Marfan syndrome, a genetic disorder affecting connective tissues that forced him to undergo open-heart surgery to repair an aortic aneurysm.
Trapp claimed in his suit that when he returned to work after the surgery, his supervisors and colleagues began a continuous campaign of insulting, harassing and giving him unwarranted negative performance reviews. He said his complaints of harassment to supervisors went unheeded — describing in court papers how co-workers would taunt him with insults like ‘you cry more than your daughter’ and ‘stop being a baby’ or teasing him about working a half-day when he left early for medical reasons.
He was fired, he claimed, after a company attorney confronted him and claimed Marfan syndrome was "not a real disorder" and that none of Trapp’s allegations of harassment was substantiated, according to court papers.
The suit claimed Trapp was shocked and devastated by his treatment, had suffered loss of self-confidence and self-esteem and was forced to see a therapist for depression and severe emotional distress. He said his wife had filed for divorce due to the economic harm inflicted on the family by his job loss.
The company denied Trapp’s allegations.
Who was judge who refused to let Mom relocate?
Was it the same judge who refused her an order of protection 3 TIMES?
Was it the same judge who gave this violent batterer visitation rights?
Because, Daddy got them. So much for daddies being discriminated against, eh? And as it turned out, Trapp slaughtered Mom when she arrrived to pick up the kids. This is not the first time a mom has been slaughtered by a violent father who was granted visitation/custodial rights. This is the not the first time a mother has been put in harm's way during child pickups and drop offs. It's not even the first case of a mother being murdered during a child pickup and dropoff. And yet these father-friendly judges continue this practice without one iota of concern for the safety and well-being of women and children. It's only about what Daddy Demands--thanks to the victory of the fathers rights movement.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/old_bridge_murder-suicide_was.html
Tragedy was waiting to erupt, friends and family say of Old Bridge couple slain in murder-suicide
Published: Saturday, December 17, 2011, 7:00 AM
Updated: Saturday, December 17, 2011, 10:45 PM
By Star-Ledger Staff
OLD BRIDGE — They appeared to be the perfect suburban couple, smiling for the camera on their tree-lined street in Old Bridge three years ago as they hugged their 2-year-old daughter dressed up like Minnie Mouse for Halloween.
"Great family pic ..." a friend commented on Facebook.
But interviews with friends and neighbors, as well as court records, show that beneath the smiles and away from the cameras, things were far different for Anthony and Heather Trapp.
They had a volatile and violent relationship that prompted Heather Trapp to twice file for divorce, obtain three restraining orders against her husband and attempt to return to her mother’s home on Staten Island, only to be rebuffed by a judge.
Heather Trapp, 37, was found dead Thursday evening inside the Rose Lane home the couple had shared until about about four months ago. She had been stabbed multiple times, authorities said Friday, allegedly by her husband who then abducted their daughters and fled north.
Early Friday, Anthony Trapp, 39, and his daughters were located at a hotel in Fort Montgomery, N.Y., 80 miles from Old Bridge.
The girls were unharmed when they were coaxed out of the open door of their father’s room around 7:30 a.m. by some of the dozens of New York state troopers who had surrounded the five-room motel. Their father was later found dead inside the room.
Police believe he had already killed himself when Emma, now 5, the toddler wearing the mouse ears and polka dot dress in the Halloween photo, opened the door, New York State Police Maj. Ed Raso said.
"We were able to motion to her, and she came out," followed moments later by her 20-month-old sister, Sophia, he said.
Members of the state police special operations team scooped them up, wrapped them in blankets and carried them to safety before they were placed in the temporary custody of relatives.
Police then spent more than an hour trying to communicate with Trapp by phone and bullhorn. At 8:40, troopers entered the room and found Trapp, 39, dead on a bed, Capt. Joseph Tripodo said.
Authorities said he apparently killed himself; they didn’t release details but said he didn’t shoot himself. An autopsy is scheduled for today.
A MOTHER'S CONCERN
Over the past few months, Heather Trapp’s mother told friends she feared for her daughter’s safety.
"He is sick in the head ... I don’t know what to do," Fran Newman, Heather’s mother, said in August, according to Lorraine Gerbino, a lifelong friend. "I’m scared for my daughter. Pray for her.
"... She knew he was going to kill her — and so did Heather," Gerbino said Friday, breaking down in tears. "Heather said to friends he was going to kill her, and he did."
Few people in Middlesex County took the threats seriously, Newman told friends.
"I guess my daughter would have to be killed for someone to say, ‘Oh, I guess she was right,’" she said in one e-mail to Gerbino.
In another, she wrote, "The laws in Middlesex County are not great for domestic violence. I don’t want my daughter to be a statistic."
Unlimited Exposures
Heather and Anthony Trapp were married in October 2004.
The couple married on Oct. 8, 2004, in Livingston, and separated at least six months before Heather Trapp filed for divorce on Aug. 23, citing irreconcilable differences, court records show.
In her petition, she sought joint legal custody of the two girls, alimony and child support, court records show. She also noted that three restraining orders were filed against her husband this year — the first on March 28 and the others on Aug. 18 — but all were dismissed.
Public records show the Trapps purchased their home on Rose Lane in Old Bridge in August 2004, two months before they married. Heather lived there until August, when she moved to a townhouse on Pendleton Place in Old Bridge, about 3 1/2 miles away.
Heather Trapp was a licensed dental hygienist in Florida, New Jersey and New York. A slight woman with a vibrant personality, she dazzled patients with her ability to always remember a face, friends said. She beamed when talking about her daughters.
But according to co-workers, she lived in fear of her 6-foot, 4-inch husband.
"She was very, very afraid," said Elizabeth Klein, a hygienist in the Old Bridge dental office where Heather Trapp worked part time.
Klein said the Trapps’ marriage had been rocky for years. Several years ago, she said, the couple sought counseling and were urged to resolved their problems. The physical abuse became worse after Anthony Trapp became ill and lost his job, Klein said.
Police said Anthony Trapp had visitation of his daughters on Thursday and when his estranged wife when to pick them up, he attacked her.
After not hearing from her and concerned about Heather Trapp’s safety, a relative phoned police at 8:55 p.m. Thursday. Police arrived at the Rose Lane home and found her dead in the kitchen. She had been stabbed multiple times, authorities said.
Police issued an Amber Alert for the two girls and eventually traced them and their father to the motel in Orange County, N.Y.
"I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE THIS"
Anthony Dalessio and his family live across the street from the Trapp home on Rose Lane, and said he and his wife were Heather’s "best friends in the neighborhood," but acknowledged the couple was "definitely having problems."
The Dalessios were at a Christmas party Thursday night when they got calls that police cars were everywhere in the neighborhood, he said.
"I can’t even imagine something like this," Dalessio said. "I’ve been up all night.
"She would do anything for her children," Dalessio said of Heather Trapp. "Thank God they’re safe. Now we have to grieve one of our best friends."
Anthony Trapp had been out of work since December 2009, when he was fired from his job at Societe Generale Americas Securities, where he had worked as a senior auditor for three years.
Trapp filed suit against the company, claiming he was unlawfully fired and discriminated against because of an ongoing disability, according to court papers. Trapp said he was diagnosed in 2008 with Marfan syndrome, a genetic disorder affecting connective tissues that forced him to undergo open-heart surgery to repair an aortic aneurysm.
Trapp claimed in his suit that when he returned to work after the surgery, his supervisors and colleagues began a continuous campaign of insulting, harassing and giving him unwarranted negative performance reviews. He said his complaints of harassment to supervisors went unheeded — describing in court papers how co-workers would taunt him with insults like ‘you cry more than your daughter’ and ‘stop being a baby’ or teasing him about working a half-day when he left early for medical reasons.
He was fired, he claimed, after a company attorney confronted him and claimed Marfan syndrome was "not a real disorder" and that none of Trapp’s allegations of harassment was substantiated, according to court papers.
The suit claimed Trapp was shocked and devastated by his treatment, had suffered loss of self-confidence and self-esteem and was forced to see a therapist for depression and severe emotional distress. He said his wife had filed for divorce due to the economic harm inflicted on the family by his job loss.
The company denied Trapp’s allegations.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Women's rights then...and now (USA)
Great post by an anonymous friend.
Women's rights today versus 20 years ago:
In 1990:
-- women in all states could pretty much count on getting "sole custody" of their children upon divorce, and good fathers' visitation rights were considered to be half of all non-work, non-school time (every other weekend, half the holidays and summers).
-- joint custody was expressly disfavored either in the statutes or case law of a supermajority of states.
-- most states still had fault divorce grounds, and where they didn't, still required lengthy formal separations.
-- women with custody of their children pretty much could pick up and move wherever they wanted to move. Restrictions were rare, and not in the law but in court orders and marital settlement agreements.
-- all states had not yet complied with the federal demand for the establishment of child support enforcement, but guidelines generally were in place -- and they actually were, on balance, more generous to women than they are today (no offsets for male parenting time, e.g., and some states had formulas that just outright took percentages of fathers' incomes.)
-- a repeated big deal in the divorce media cases was whether this or that millionaire would actually have to give a full "half" of his assets accumulated during the marriage to his ex-wife, instead of, say 30 or 40%. Much theoretical commentary on this but, of course, little relevance to 90% of the divorcing population.
-- more women kept their own last names upon marriage than do so today.
-- the problem of women wanting to remain with the kids in the marital home instead of having to leave upon obtaining dv injunctions was being addressed, except in instances in which her name was not on the title or lease. Where it was, in at least some states, an alternate to a dv injunction was to just file for divorce and get an order for him to vacate the premises (largely unheard of today).
-- a lot of talk was ensuing about women's economic plights compared with men's situations post-divorce, but that never went anywhere, never translated into demonstrable changes in alimony theory that alleviated this a whit. The talking also presumed that mothers would have custody of their children post-divorce.
-- the few psychs who occasionally were called into divorce cases and who wrote opinions and articles were still saying things like small children belong with their historical primary caregivers, and that primary caregiving = attachment.
-- primary caregiving was a factor in most state custody determination statutes that were "gender neutral".
-- unwed mothers were universally considered to be the sole natural custodian of their children; often they did not name the paternates, and often they did not get child support. Sometimes, though, they got welfare.
-- fewer women remained childless (although 80% today still become mothers)
-- the percentage of women applicants to most professional and graduate schools was about the same as it is today; the mean age of women getting married was lower than today; women were less likely than today to live in poverty, even though (due in part to affirmative action) women today outpace men in obtaining higher degrees, and even though today a far higher percentage of mothers are in the workforce; and far and away the largest segment of the population living in poverty is single mothers with children
Since 1990, the amount of money donated to members of Congress, for campaigns and in connection with lobbying, ostensibly to promote women's issues, by various women's issue organizations (virtually all of it going to the Democratic Party) has increased astronomically, both in the absolute sense and relative to other donations.
HOW ARE WE DOING?
Women's rights today versus 20 years ago:
In 1990:
-- women in all states could pretty much count on getting "sole custody" of their children upon divorce, and good fathers' visitation rights were considered to be half of all non-work, non-school time (every other weekend, half the holidays and summers).
-- joint custody was expressly disfavored either in the statutes or case law of a supermajority of states.
-- most states still had fault divorce grounds, and where they didn't, still required lengthy formal separations.
-- women with custody of their children pretty much could pick up and move wherever they wanted to move. Restrictions were rare, and not in the law but in court orders and marital settlement agreements.
-- all states had not yet complied with the federal demand for the establishment of child support enforcement, but guidelines generally were in place -- and they actually were, on balance, more generous to women than they are today (no offsets for male parenting time, e.g., and some states had formulas that just outright took percentages of fathers' incomes.)
-- a repeated big deal in the divorce media cases was whether this or that millionaire would actually have to give a full "half" of his assets accumulated during the marriage to his ex-wife, instead of, say 30 or 40%. Much theoretical commentary on this but, of course, little relevance to 90% of the divorcing population.
-- more women kept their own last names upon marriage than do so today.
-- the problem of women wanting to remain with the kids in the marital home instead of having to leave upon obtaining dv injunctions was being addressed, except in instances in which her name was not on the title or lease. Where it was, in at least some states, an alternate to a dv injunction was to just file for divorce and get an order for him to vacate the premises (largely unheard of today).
-- a lot of talk was ensuing about women's economic plights compared with men's situations post-divorce, but that never went anywhere, never translated into demonstrable changes in alimony theory that alleviated this a whit. The talking also presumed that mothers would have custody of their children post-divorce.
-- the few psychs who occasionally were called into divorce cases and who wrote opinions and articles were still saying things like small children belong with their historical primary caregivers, and that primary caregiving = attachment.
-- primary caregiving was a factor in most state custody determination statutes that were "gender neutral".
-- unwed mothers were universally considered to be the sole natural custodian of their children; often they did not name the paternates, and often they did not get child support. Sometimes, though, they got welfare.
-- fewer women remained childless (although 80% today still become mothers)
-- the percentage of women applicants to most professional and graduate schools was about the same as it is today; the mean age of women getting married was lower than today; women were less likely than today to live in poverty, even though (due in part to affirmative action) women today outpace men in obtaining higher degrees, and even though today a far higher percentage of mothers are in the workforce; and far and away the largest segment of the population living in poverty is single mothers with children
Since 1990, the amount of money donated to members of Congress, for campaigns and in connection with lobbying, ostensibly to promote women's issues, by various women's issue organizations (virtually all of it going to the Democratic Party) has increased astronomically, both in the absolute sense and relative to other donations.
HOW ARE WE DOING?
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Dad seeking "joint custody" murders mom; leaves sicko note for kids, telling them not to come in house (Westborough, Massachusetts)
For years, the fathers rights people have assured us that once daddies got joint custody and the like, their hurt feelings would be assuaged and the killing and violence would stop.
Hasn't worked that way. Now these guys are just more entitled and violent than ever. Of course, anybody with any basic knowledge of the psychology of terrorism could have told you that.
No doubt this woman knew her soon-to-be ex, RICHARD "TODD" BIBART, was a serious threat to her and their children. That's why she was hoping for sole custody and a moveaway. Of course, Daddy was pushing for joint custody and no moveaway--that way he could continue to control and abuse her for years to come, see.
Well, Daddy couldn't even wait to find out whether he got his way in court or not. Killing for these guys is just the ultimate assertion of macho power. And some of them just can't resist the immediate thrill kill.
Notice that this sick bastard also went through the ultra-phony sympathetic motions of leaving a note for the kids, who were only 8 and 6, telling them not to come in the house. (As if kids that age could even process a note like that.) If this sh**head had really cared about the well being of those kids, he would have stopped terrorizing their mother and left the family alone.
Hat tip to A.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/westborough/news/x1966823021/Murder-victim-to-be-buried-Saturday-in-Pennsylvania
Murder victim was buried Saturday in Pennsylvania
Rebecca Bibart
By Jeff Malachowski/Daily News staff
MetroWest Daily News
Posted Nov 27, 2010 @ 11:22 AM
Last update Nov 30, 2010 @ 01:07 PM
WESTBOROUGH — Funeral services for Rebecca Bibart, whose husband officials say murdered her last week in their Westborough home, were held Saturday in Pennsylvania.
A memorial Mass was held Saturday morning at St. Michael Roman Catholic Church in Greenville, Pa., where Bibart was born, according to an obituary on the Loutzenhiser Jordan Colonial Funeral Home website. A private burial followed.
A memorial fund in Bibart's memory has been established for her children. Donations may be made to the Joseph and Meghan Bibart Education Fund, c/o Shenango Valley Foundation, 33 Chestnut St., Sharon, PA 16146.
Bibart, 41, died of "sharp force injuries to the neck" and "blunt force trauma to the head" inflicted by her husband Richard "Todd" Bibart, according to preliminary results from the state medical examiner's office. Pound found Rebecca dead in the basement of her 27 Thomas Newton Drive home last Thursday. Richard Bibart was found dead in an upstairs bedroom.
Authorities found a weapon used in the murder but are not disclosing what it is.
Police are awaiting toxicology results following an autopsy on Richard Bibart, 43.
A neighbor found a note on the front door directing the Bibart's two children, ages 6 and 8, to stay outside and call police. The two children were not home during the incident.
Authorities said the Bibarts had clashed in recent divorce proceedings over custody and support of their children. Rebecca Bibart had sought full custody of the children and wanted to take them out of Massachusetts. She also sought suitable support for her and the children, according to records in Worcester Probate and Family Court.
Richard Bibart sought joint custody of the children and a denial of his wife's request to move out of state, court records said. He also requested suitable support for the children's health insurance.
Rebecca Bibart filed for divorce in September, court records said, after the 17-year marriage "suffered an irretrievable breakdown."
The couple married on July 24, 1993, in Pennsylvania. The couple's home, which they bought in 2007, was up for sale.
In Westborough, Rebecca Bibart worked as a yoga instructor and an assistant in the Westborough Public Library's children's room.
Hasn't worked that way. Now these guys are just more entitled and violent than ever. Of course, anybody with any basic knowledge of the psychology of terrorism could have told you that.
No doubt this woman knew her soon-to-be ex, RICHARD "TODD" BIBART, was a serious threat to her and their children. That's why she was hoping for sole custody and a moveaway. Of course, Daddy was pushing for joint custody and no moveaway--that way he could continue to control and abuse her for years to come, see.
Well, Daddy couldn't even wait to find out whether he got his way in court or not. Killing for these guys is just the ultimate assertion of macho power. And some of them just can't resist the immediate thrill kill.
Notice that this sick bastard also went through the ultra-phony sympathetic motions of leaving a note for the kids, who were only 8 and 6, telling them not to come in the house. (As if kids that age could even process a note like that.) If this sh**head had really cared about the well being of those kids, he would have stopped terrorizing their mother and left the family alone.
Hat tip to A.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/westborough/news/x1966823021/Murder-victim-to-be-buried-Saturday-in-Pennsylvania
Murder victim was buried Saturday in Pennsylvania
Rebecca Bibart
By Jeff Malachowski/Daily News staff
MetroWest Daily News
Posted Nov 27, 2010 @ 11:22 AM
Last update Nov 30, 2010 @ 01:07 PM
WESTBOROUGH — Funeral services for Rebecca Bibart, whose husband officials say murdered her last week in their Westborough home, were held Saturday in Pennsylvania.
A memorial Mass was held Saturday morning at St. Michael Roman Catholic Church in Greenville, Pa., where Bibart was born, according to an obituary on the Loutzenhiser Jordan Colonial Funeral Home website. A private burial followed.
A memorial fund in Bibart's memory has been established for her children. Donations may be made to the Joseph and Meghan Bibart Education Fund, c/o Shenango Valley Foundation, 33 Chestnut St., Sharon, PA 16146.
Bibart, 41, died of "sharp force injuries to the neck" and "blunt force trauma to the head" inflicted by her husband Richard "Todd" Bibart, according to preliminary results from the state medical examiner's office. Pound found Rebecca dead in the basement of her 27 Thomas Newton Drive home last Thursday. Richard Bibart was found dead in an upstairs bedroom.
Authorities found a weapon used in the murder but are not disclosing what it is.
Police are awaiting toxicology results following an autopsy on Richard Bibart, 43.
A neighbor found a note on the front door directing the Bibart's two children, ages 6 and 8, to stay outside and call police. The two children were not home during the incident.
Authorities said the Bibarts had clashed in recent divorce proceedings over custody and support of their children. Rebecca Bibart had sought full custody of the children and wanted to take them out of Massachusetts. She also sought suitable support for her and the children, according to records in Worcester Probate and Family Court.
Richard Bibart sought joint custody of the children and a denial of his wife's request to move out of state, court records said. He also requested suitable support for the children's health insurance.
Rebecca Bibart filed for divorce in September, court records said, after the 17-year marriage "suffered an irretrievable breakdown."
The couple married on July 24, 1993, in Pennsylvania. The couple's home, which they bought in 2007, was up for sale.
In Westborough, Rebecca Bibart worked as a yoga instructor and an assistant in the Westborough Public Library's children's room.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Women's Shelters criticize automatic joint custody for unwed fathers ruling (Germany)
I've been following this story for a while, which is the decision in Germany to grant unwed fathers more or less automatic joint custody, with no regard to the mother's wishes or the father's overall fitness. Finally we are seeing German women speaking out against this as it becomes clear what the implications will be for protective mothers and all unmarried mother in general. It's basically having a husband control your life, but it's a guy you never agreed to marry in the first place who's doing the controlling.
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5890680,00.html
11.08.2010
Women 11.08.2010
Germany's women's shelters criticize custody ruling
Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Around 40,000 women and children flee to shelters yearly
Women's shelters in Germany fear a court ruling to grant unwed fathers custody will put abused women in greater danger. Others hailed the Federal Constitutional Court's decision as a victory for single fathers.
Germany's women's shelters have joined the country's largest single parents' organization in opposing increased rights for unmarried fathers.
Until now, the fathers of children born out of wedlock in Germany had no legally guaranteed custody rights. Mothers had the right to withhold joint custody, leaving the father to sue the mother for visitation rights.
But Edith Schwab, head of Germany's Association of Single Mothers and Fathers, says the Federal Constitutional Court's decision last week to grant custody rights to unwed fathers is bad news for single mothers, who themselves will now have to fight to keep unfit fathers from raising their children.
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Now courts can award single fathers full custody
"Mothers who refuse to share custody have very, very good reasons for their decision -meaning that the potential for conflict between the parents is so great that the mother has rightly chosen to deny joint custody," she said.
Worse yet - according to Heike Herold, who works with an organization that coordinates women's shelters across Germany - in abuse scenarios, increasing fathers' rights can undermine the safety of mother and child.
"It becomes problematic when there's domestic violence, but also when you think of cases in which children are conceived by rape," Herold told Deutsche Welle. "When you think of the legislature automatically giving these fathers custody, it becomes quite critical."
A victory for single fathers
On August 3, Germany's Constitutional Court in the southwestern city of Karlsruhe deemed that "the current legal situation excessively encroached on paternity rights for fathers of children born out of wedlock, because they could only take part in raising the child with the mother's consent," according to spokeswoman Judith Blohm.
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: The constitutional court ruled that fathers should have the same rights as mothers
Blohm said that until now "the fathers also didn't have the right to have a court determine what arrangement was in the best interest of the child."
The case for increased rights was mounted by a father who had no way to prevent the mother of his child from moving to another city and taking the child with her. The decision, which is expected to be drafted into law when the legislature returns from its summer break, was heralded as a victory for fathers' rights.
Thorsten Nitz, an underground train driver, was one of the many fathers across Germany who welcomed the decision. Nitz, who has been denied custody of his children since splitting up with his former partner, said he was "relieved when the ruling came," adding, "It's been overdue for years."
Harder to cut ties with abusive partners
Herold sees the flipside to this new right. Although she welcomes increased paternity rights in principle, she feels there needs to be a system in place to review fathers' suitability before granting them joint custody.
The decision makes it much more difficult for unmarried women to cut off ties with abusive partners, Herold said, adding that unmarried women who left abusive relationships "didn't have the problem that their partner, as the biological father of the child, necessarily had access to the child as part of his visitation and custody rights."
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Increased fathers' rights could threaten abused mothers' anonymity Under the new law, she says, a victim of abuse will "potentially have to mount a court case to protect herself and her children."
"Giving the father custody rights also means that the mother cannot decide alone to move to another city or switch her child's school," Herold added.
Tracking down mothers through their children
As it is, she said, visitation rights alone often give abusive fathers the opportunity to track down their child's mother, forcing abused mothers to flee from one halfway home to the next.
Herold added that, in cases of children born within wedlock, German courts already assume that contact to the father is nearly always in the child's best interest. She worries that more children will now have to live with abusive fathers.
"We know from experience that many family courts operate on the premise that joint custody is the new way of doing things. They ask the parents to ‘please settle their disputes in the interest of the child' – but that doesn't work when one side uses violence against the other," she said.
According to Herold's shelter coordination network, some 20,000 abused women seek shelter in halfway houses every year in Germany – with another 20,000 children accompanying them. Germany's federal family ministry estimates that a quarter of the country's female population will be physically abused by a sexual partner.
Author: David Levitz
Editor: Ben Knight
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5890680,00.html
11.08.2010
Women 11.08.2010
Germany's women's shelters criticize custody ruling
Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Around 40,000 women and children flee to shelters yearly
Women's shelters in Germany fear a court ruling to grant unwed fathers custody will put abused women in greater danger. Others hailed the Federal Constitutional Court's decision as a victory for single fathers.
Germany's women's shelters have joined the country's largest single parents' organization in opposing increased rights for unmarried fathers.
Until now, the fathers of children born out of wedlock in Germany had no legally guaranteed custody rights. Mothers had the right to withhold joint custody, leaving the father to sue the mother for visitation rights.
But Edith Schwab, head of Germany's Association of Single Mothers and Fathers, says the Federal Constitutional Court's decision last week to grant custody rights to unwed fathers is bad news for single mothers, who themselves will now have to fight to keep unfit fathers from raising their children.
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Now courts can award single fathers full custody
"Mothers who refuse to share custody have very, very good reasons for their decision -meaning that the potential for conflict between the parents is so great that the mother has rightly chosen to deny joint custody," she said.
Worse yet - according to Heike Herold, who works with an organization that coordinates women's shelters across Germany - in abuse scenarios, increasing fathers' rights can undermine the safety of mother and child.
"It becomes problematic when there's domestic violence, but also when you think of cases in which children are conceived by rape," Herold told Deutsche Welle. "When you think of the legislature automatically giving these fathers custody, it becomes quite critical."
A victory for single fathers
On August 3, Germany's Constitutional Court in the southwestern city of Karlsruhe deemed that "the current legal situation excessively encroached on paternity rights for fathers of children born out of wedlock, because they could only take part in raising the child with the mother's consent," according to spokeswoman Judith Blohm.
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: The constitutional court ruled that fathers should have the same rights as mothers
Blohm said that until now "the fathers also didn't have the right to have a court determine what arrangement was in the best interest of the child."
The case for increased rights was mounted by a father who had no way to prevent the mother of his child from moving to another city and taking the child with her. The decision, which is expected to be drafted into law when the legislature returns from its summer break, was heralded as a victory for fathers' rights.
Thorsten Nitz, an underground train driver, was one of the many fathers across Germany who welcomed the decision. Nitz, who has been denied custody of his children since splitting up with his former partner, said he was "relieved when the ruling came," adding, "It's been overdue for years."
Harder to cut ties with abusive partners
Herold sees the flipside to this new right. Although she welcomes increased paternity rights in principle, she feels there needs to be a system in place to review fathers' suitability before granting them joint custody.
The decision makes it much more difficult for unmarried women to cut off ties with abusive partners, Herold said, adding that unmarried women who left abusive relationships "didn't have the problem that their partner, as the biological father of the child, necessarily had access to the child as part of his visitation and custody rights."
Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Increased fathers' rights could threaten abused mothers' anonymity Under the new law, she says, a victim of abuse will "potentially have to mount a court case to protect herself and her children."
"Giving the father custody rights also means that the mother cannot decide alone to move to another city or switch her child's school," Herold added.
Tracking down mothers through their children
As it is, she said, visitation rights alone often give abusive fathers the opportunity to track down their child's mother, forcing abused mothers to flee from one halfway home to the next.
Herold added that, in cases of children born within wedlock, German courts already assume that contact to the father is nearly always in the child's best interest. She worries that more children will now have to live with abusive fathers.
"We know from experience that many family courts operate on the premise that joint custody is the new way of doing things. They ask the parents to ‘please settle their disputes in the interest of the child' – but that doesn't work when one side uses violence against the other," she said.
According to Herold's shelter coordination network, some 20,000 abused women seek shelter in halfway houses every year in Germany – with another 20,000 children accompanying them. Germany's federal family ministry estimates that a quarter of the country's female population will be physically abused by a sexual partner.
Author: David Levitz
Editor: Ben Knight
Friday, May 14, 2010
Murdered mom's last act: pleading for life of 2-year-old son (Zeeland, Michigan)
Just appalling. This mom did everything she could do--short of finding a hit man to take out her extremely violent ex-husband, DONOVAN MORRIS, the father of her 2-year-old son. She got a divorce, got custody of her child (very difficult these days), got a protection order, even managed to get moveaway rights (also very difficult, as a lot of judges are refusing mothers' requests for moveaways). She took her son clear across the country--from North Carolina to California--but it still didn't save her life. Morris tracked her down like some kind of animal, and abducted her at gunpoint from the hallway outside her apartment. She was later found murdered in the parking garage below her apartment complex. Mom's last act? Pleading with the killer to abduct her instead of the child, and spare his life.
http://www.hollandsentinel.com/feature/x1560859229/Murdered-Zeeland-mom-s-last-act-pleading-for-son-s-life
Murdered Zeeland mom’s last act pleading for son’s life
Fund established for care of Bodkins' orphaned toddler
By MEGAN SCHMIDT
The Holland Sentinel
Posted May 13, 2010 @ 06:06 PM
Last update May 13, 2010 @ 10:54 PM
Zeeland, MI — Even though Ivy Bodkins moved across the country, it wasn’t enough to keep her estranged husband from stalking her.
She had moved from North Carolina to Long Beach, Calif., taking along 2-year-old son Kalin, in pursuit of a new life for both of them.
But her fresh start was cut short this week when Bodkins, a 1999 Zeeland High School graduate, was found dead in the parking garage below her apartment complex in Long Beach.
Several hours later, her husband, too, was dead, after police tracked him down and a standoff ensued in a parking lot about 100 miles away.
After the shock of losing Bodkins, her family is figuring out how — and who — will raise her young child.
In the meantime, a memorial fund has been established to help pay for Kalin’s future needs, including education, as well as funeral and travel costs.
Ivy Bodkins’s father and stepmother, Brad and Linda, have temporary custody of Kalin and will likely seek permanent custody, Mike Bodkins, Ivy Bodkins’s uncle, said.
Even while she was being held at gunpoint, Ivy Bodkins was thinking of her son, Mike Bodkins said.
“She was really instrumental in saving Kalin’s life,” he said.
On Monday, Ivy Bodkins left for a morning workout and upon her return, was abducted in the hallway outside her apartment, he said.
She begged her husband, Donovan Morris, to take her and not her son.
It was not the first time Morris had been violent toward her.
While living in North Carolina, “there was a severe incident of domestic abuse where he beat her up,” Mike Bodkins said. “He was found guilty and initially given probation but he violated it and ended up serving six months in jail.”
After getting out, Morris followed Ivy Bodkins’s trail to California.
Bodkins tried to take precautions, such as filing for divorce and a personal-protection order and living in a highly populated community with good security, her uncle said.
It wasn’t enough.
“It was a tragic occurrence and it’s so similar to so many where husbands violently kill an ex-wife or lover,” Mike Bodkins said. “I think in some ways people can be naive as to the minds of perpetrators and how determined they are to do such a bad thing.”
A private memorial service for Ivy Bodkins’s friends and family in Michigan is tentatively scheduled for May 23, Mike Bodkins said.
The Bodkins memorial fund has been established through Huntington National Bank in Zeeland. Checks can be made out to Jack Dekker.
http://www.hollandsentinel.com/feature/x1560859229/Murdered-Zeeland-mom-s-last-act-pleading-for-son-s-life
Murdered Zeeland mom’s last act pleading for son’s life
Fund established for care of Bodkins' orphaned toddler
By MEGAN SCHMIDT
The Holland Sentinel
Posted May 13, 2010 @ 06:06 PM
Last update May 13, 2010 @ 10:54 PM
Zeeland, MI — Even though Ivy Bodkins moved across the country, it wasn’t enough to keep her estranged husband from stalking her.
She had moved from North Carolina to Long Beach, Calif., taking along 2-year-old son Kalin, in pursuit of a new life for both of them.
But her fresh start was cut short this week when Bodkins, a 1999 Zeeland High School graduate, was found dead in the parking garage below her apartment complex in Long Beach.
Several hours later, her husband, too, was dead, after police tracked him down and a standoff ensued in a parking lot about 100 miles away.
After the shock of losing Bodkins, her family is figuring out how — and who — will raise her young child.
In the meantime, a memorial fund has been established to help pay for Kalin’s future needs, including education, as well as funeral and travel costs.
Ivy Bodkins’s father and stepmother, Brad and Linda, have temporary custody of Kalin and will likely seek permanent custody, Mike Bodkins, Ivy Bodkins’s uncle, said.
Even while she was being held at gunpoint, Ivy Bodkins was thinking of her son, Mike Bodkins said.
“She was really instrumental in saving Kalin’s life,” he said.
On Monday, Ivy Bodkins left for a morning workout and upon her return, was abducted in the hallway outside her apartment, he said.
She begged her husband, Donovan Morris, to take her and not her son.
It was not the first time Morris had been violent toward her.
While living in North Carolina, “there was a severe incident of domestic abuse where he beat her up,” Mike Bodkins said. “He was found guilty and initially given probation but he violated it and ended up serving six months in jail.”
After getting out, Morris followed Ivy Bodkins’s trail to California.
Bodkins tried to take precautions, such as filing for divorce and a personal-protection order and living in a highly populated community with good security, her uncle said.
It wasn’t enough.
“It was a tragic occurrence and it’s so similar to so many where husbands violently kill an ex-wife or lover,” Mike Bodkins said. “I think in some ways people can be naive as to the minds of perpetrators and how determined they are to do such a bad thing.”
A private memorial service for Ivy Bodkins’s friends and family in Michigan is tentatively scheduled for May 23, Mike Bodkins said.
The Bodkins memorial fund has been established through Huntington National Bank in Zeeland. Checks can be made out to Jack Dekker.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Dad with joint custody who shot and killed 2 sons to be arraigned (Scottsdale, Arizona)
Dad ANDRE LETEVE is the latest killer dad horror story to come out of Maricopa County.
Here's my ongoing list of killer dads to come out of Maricopa, and these are just the murders that had a custody/visitation angle:
Here's my ongoing list of killer dads to come out of Maricopa, and these are just the murders that had a custody/visitation angle:
The Killer Dads of Maricopa County, Arizona
Father: ALLEN CHAMBERS
Victim(s): Mindi Chambers (17 years)
Date of Death: Assumed to have been murdered around the time she went missing in 1982.
Custodial father ALLEN CHAMBERS is now presumed to have murdered Mindi Chambers around the time she went missing. Daughter had reported sexual abuse to the authorities. Not reported as officially missing til 1995.
Father: JEFFREY DUCHANE
Victim(s): Trenay Duchane (12 years)
Date of Death: Nov. 2008
Custodial father and stepmother convicted of murder.
Father: RAUL MOLINA GONZALEZ
Victim(s): Anthony Gonzalez (11 years)
Date of Death: Summer 2005
Father convicted of murdering son during summer visitation.
Father: NUSHAWN CAMPBELL
Victim(s): Son (5 years)
Date of Death: June 2009
Father with sole custody stabs son to death in failed murder-suicide. Mother had been trying to regain custody.
Now Andre Leteve is "accused" of gunning down his two young sons in cold blood. Why? No doubt the idiots will blame the ongoing divorce. But divorce is a result of relationship breakdown, not the cause.
And then there are the idiots who will start in on the standard whine about this father's grief at "losing his children." Well, that's a big lie, too. The couple had already agreed to joint custody.
You know, joint custody, the big "reform" that's been pushed on us the over last few years by fathers rights people and their clueless allies. The big reform that was supposed to put an end to this kind of violence, as we finally calmed all those "desperate" fathers who were "pushed over the edge."
What a crock that turned out to be. Can we finally admit that pushing "joint custody" with abusive and/or "mentally disturbed" people like Leteve has been a huge mistake, and that children are dying as a result? Common sense should have told us that if a father was willing to murder his kids over his supposed "grief," then such a volatile nutcase was not a safe person to have around children.
Oh, but note the next excuse. The mother "might" have been looking at a moveaway with the children. Oh, of course. Rather than let the mother move away where she and the children might have been safer, we gun down the kids now. Are you starting to get the real picture here? This has nothing to do with grief. It has everything to do with abuse and coercive control.
In truth, that mother should have moved out of state LONG AGO with no interference, approvals, or permissions required by the courts. No custodial rights for the father at all, no forwarding address. Then maybe two little boys would still be alive today.
http://www.azfamily.com/news/Scottsdale-father-accused-of-killing-2-sons-to-be-arraigned-today-91464234.html
Scottsdale father accused of killing 2 sons to be arraigned today
by Catherine Holland and Dan Neligh
Posted on April 19, 2010 at 7:01 AM
Updated today at 9:17 AM
PHOENIX -- The Scottsdale father accused of killing his two young sons before turning the gun on himself is scheduled to arraignment Monday.
Andre Leteve was released from the hospital and wheeled into the Maricopa County jail last Monday.
According to investigators, 38-year-old real estate broker Andre Leteve and his wife Laurie were going through a divorce.
On March 31, police said Andre Leteve called 911 and said he had shot his child. When they arrived at his Scottsdale home, officers found his sons, 5-year-old Alec and 1-year-old Asher, dead.
Andre was alive with what police say was a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.
Police say Laurie Leteve was not home at the time. Laurie's family attorney Bob Jensen said there was no indication that Andre would become violent.
"I will challenge anyone to say that there were warning signs here that should have been picked up on by her, by the lawyers by anyone," Jensen said. "They just simply didn't exist."
Jensen also said there had never been a threat that Andre would lose his children; the couple had agreed to joint custody.
Jensen also said that the divorce had been relatively amicable with the exception of a few recent, angry emails.
"It's not surprising that he might feel some anger, justified or unjustified, just by the fact that he was not the party making this decision."
Nonetheless, he said there was never enough apparent anger to raise concerns about the safety of the children.
New court documents, however, call Leteve physically ill and and mentally disturbed.
According to investigators, Leteve told them he killed the boys because he was afraid their mother was going to move them to Florida.
Leteve was not expected to be in the courtroom. Rather the arraignment will take place via video. He is being held without bond.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Judge: Dad "unacceptable risk of abuse" after semen found on daughter's bedsheets, but he still gets visitation and Mom can't move (Sydney, Australia)
Huh? According to Family Court Judge Rodney Burr, UNNAMED DAD poses an "unacceptable risk of abuse" to his two daughters after his semen was found on one of the child's bedsheets. I'd say. But then the same judge says Creeper Dad is still entitled to see his children regularly and Mom is barred from moving.
Who the hell says that daddies are discriminated against in family court?? I'm sure not seeing it. It's looking to me like everybody is pretty literally bending over backwards for them these days.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/family-court-orders-rehearing-20091230-ljy8.html
Family Court orders rehearing
ADELE HORIN
December 31, 2009
A FATHER found by a Family Court judge to pose an ''unacceptable risk of abuse'' to his two young daughters after his semen was found on the older child's bedsheet was nevertheless ruled entitled to see his children regularly, and the mother was ordered not to move them interstate.
The mother faced arrest for contempt of court orders after she moved her children and refused to return them to the state where the father lived.
But the full bench of the Family Court, in a decision released just before Christmas, has found the mother's case needs to be reconsidered by another judge of the Family Court.
In the interim, the court has allowed the children to stay in NSW, where the mother has remarried and has a new baby and the daughters are settled in school. The father will still be able to have supervised access to the children but he will now have to travel to NSW to do so.
Women's legal groups are pleased the full bench has overturned what they called an ''extraordinary'' decision by the single judge, Justice Rodney Burr, to make the mother return to the state where the father lived for supervised access even though he was deemed an ''unacceptable risk''. But men's groups say the decision is a setback for shared parenting laws.
Justice Burr had found the then six-year-old daughter's account of her father's ''inappropriate sexual behaviour'' to be ''compelling''. Of a police video of her testimony taken in July 2005, he wrote: ''What is witnessed is a young, open and engaging little girl relating a totally believable and persuasive account of inappropriate sexual behaviour by her father.''
As well, he accepted the evidence of a ''highly experienced'' child psychiatrist who concluded that the evidence was ''highly suggestive of the father having sexually abused at least [the older girl] and thereby having placed [the younger daughter] also in a situation of risk of future abuse''.
Justice Burr understood why the mother would adopt ''such an intensely obstructive attitude'' to the father seeing the children, given she had been privy ''first hand'' to the allegations of her daughter.
But he found in his decision in October last year that the children loved their father and needed a regular relationship with him through supervised visits. He did not trust the mother to facilitate contact if she was allowed to move the children to NSW.
''I am satisfied that her open defiance and blatant disobedience of previous court orders is not confined to the past,'' the judge wrote.
He also ordered the children to attend a protective behaviours program to learn how to protect themselves from unwanted sexual touching and other dangers.
The full court of three judges found Justice Burr gave inadequate regard to the father's long-term parenting capacity given the finding of ''unacceptable risk'' and he had also failed to properly consider whether it was necessary for the mother to move the children back in order for the father to have time with them.
Who the hell says that daddies are discriminated against in family court?? I'm sure not seeing it. It's looking to me like everybody is pretty literally bending over backwards for them these days.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/family-court-orders-rehearing-20091230-ljy8.html
Family Court orders rehearing
ADELE HORIN
December 31, 2009
A FATHER found by a Family Court judge to pose an ''unacceptable risk of abuse'' to his two young daughters after his semen was found on the older child's bedsheet was nevertheless ruled entitled to see his children regularly, and the mother was ordered not to move them interstate.
The mother faced arrest for contempt of court orders after she moved her children and refused to return them to the state where the father lived.
But the full bench of the Family Court, in a decision released just before Christmas, has found the mother's case needs to be reconsidered by another judge of the Family Court.
In the interim, the court has allowed the children to stay in NSW, where the mother has remarried and has a new baby and the daughters are settled in school. The father will still be able to have supervised access to the children but he will now have to travel to NSW to do so.
Women's legal groups are pleased the full bench has overturned what they called an ''extraordinary'' decision by the single judge, Justice Rodney Burr, to make the mother return to the state where the father lived for supervised access even though he was deemed an ''unacceptable risk''. But men's groups say the decision is a setback for shared parenting laws.
Justice Burr had found the then six-year-old daughter's account of her father's ''inappropriate sexual behaviour'' to be ''compelling''. Of a police video of her testimony taken in July 2005, he wrote: ''What is witnessed is a young, open and engaging little girl relating a totally believable and persuasive account of inappropriate sexual behaviour by her father.''
As well, he accepted the evidence of a ''highly experienced'' child psychiatrist who concluded that the evidence was ''highly suggestive of the father having sexually abused at least [the older girl] and thereby having placed [the younger daughter] also in a situation of risk of future abuse''.
Justice Burr understood why the mother would adopt ''such an intensely obstructive attitude'' to the father seeing the children, given she had been privy ''first hand'' to the allegations of her daughter.
But he found in his decision in October last year that the children loved their father and needed a regular relationship with him through supervised visits. He did not trust the mother to facilitate contact if she was allowed to move the children to NSW.
''I am satisfied that her open defiance and blatant disobedience of previous court orders is not confined to the past,'' the judge wrote.
He also ordered the children to attend a protective behaviours program to learn how to protect themselves from unwanted sexual touching and other dangers.
The full court of three judges found Justice Burr gave inadequate regard to the father's long-term parenting capacity given the finding of ''unacceptable risk'' and he had also failed to properly consider whether it was necessary for the mother to move the children back in order for the father to have time with them.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Incompetent Judge Jose Padilla utterly fails mother (Peoria, Arizona)
Great column by Laurie Roberts of the Arizona Republic on the murders of Dawn Axsom and Linda Braden.
Judging by what I read here, I am more convinced than ever that Judge Jose Padilla needs to be removed from the bench NOW. This buffoon basically sentenced Dawn Axsom to death by refusing to let her move away from her crazy abusive ex-boyfriend GABE SCHWARTZ, the father of her 2-year-old son. The son that Daddy Dearest, out of his great paternal compassion, ABANDONED at the murder scene. Now the judge is trying to back pedal and claim he didn't know the full story. Bull malarkey. Mom said plenty--if only the smug and idiotic judge had listened.
Judge failed to serve domestic-violence victims
by Laurie Roberts - Oct. 28, 2009 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
You cannot watch the grainy courtroom video and not want to punch something - the rewind button perhaps.
There is the woman, her head in her hands after asking a judge to let her leave the state yet not telling him why she needed to go. And there is the judge, pointing out that she can leave whenever she wants. She just can't take her 22-month-old son with her.
"If I permit the relocation, the relationship between dad and his son will forever be irreparably harmed and I will not permit that," Judge Jose Padilla said during an Oct. 6 hearing.
Ten days later, Peoria police say the child's father, 28-year-old Gabe Schwartz, shot and killed the child's mother and grandmother before killing himself, leaving the baby to fend for himself.
Dawn Axsom, her mother, Linda Braden, and their killer became Arizona's 93rd, 94th and 95th people to die as a result of domestic violence this year, according to the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
Dawn's father and stepmother are trying to come to grips with the deaths and with Padilla's decision to force her to stay. "Dawn believed she would be able to go," her stepmother, Kathy Axsom, told me. "I really think she had confidence in the system and obviously it failed her."
There is a lesson in the death of Dawn Axsom for the judges of this state. And for the many other Dawns out there, 30 of whom will be dead before the end of the year, if statistics hold true.
Axsom, 23, and Schwartz lived together briefly but by the time their son, Xavier, was 2 months old, Axsom was the only real parent. Family members and Axsom, in her testimony, said that Schwartz would baby-sit but that stopped after he overdosed on her grandmother's medication while alone with the boy. In July, Axsom filed for child support and he countered with a request for joint custody. A week later, court records indicate that he broke into Axsom's Peoria home and got into her bed. She awoke as he was taking off her clothes.
Axsom got an order of protection the next day.
Padilla knew about that order of protection on Oct. 6, but curiously, he asked no questions about their relationship. And Axsom never told the judge or even her attorney what was really going on, that Schwartz was threatening her, telling her he would never let her leave.
"My daughter was very strong but she was afraid of this man," Gary Axsom told me. "He had texted her so much that her hair was turning gray like mine."
I don't know why she didn't tell the judge, or her attorney, Ron Saper. Maybe it's because she thought she could handle it. Maybe it's because Schwartz was in the courtroom. Or maybe it's because she trusted the judge to get it right.
To listen when she testified that Schwartz had never been able to hold down a job and that he had tried to commit suicide several times, once while alone with their son. To hear her when she told him that Schwartz wasn't involved in the child's life and had never bought so much as a diaper. To remember that order of protection and to ask questions when Axsom testified that she and her mother wanted to move to Maryland to take care of an elderly family member. To consider the fact that this was her chance to go to school so that she could provide her son a better life.
Instead, the judge announced that the child would remain in Arizona for the time being to be near his dad. When Saper questioned how Axsom could realistically stay without the help of her mother, Padilla had a smug reply.
"Well, she doesn't have to remain here is the bottom line," he said.
Saper: "Well, she's not going to leave the child with him, your honor."
Padilla: "Well, again, that is her choice."
Padilla also offered a helpful suggestion. Schwartz, he said, could baby-sit while Axsom is at work, easing child-care expenses. He did order Schwartz to undergo mental-health and drug evaluations by January, but in the meantime ordered visitation four days a week, leaving me to wonder if there was something wrong with the video of the hearing that I was watching.
There was nothing wrong with the video, according to Elizabeth Ditlevson, of the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Ditlevson said far too many judges don't take domestic violence seriously.
"Judge Padilla is part of the problem but he is not the problem," she said. "The problem is a system that allows judges to act like this and that is privileging abusers access to children over victim and child safety."
Saper said he can't take issue with Padilla's decision to keep the child here, given that neither he nor the judge knew the extent of the threats to Axsom. "I would have given the judge and I did give the judge every single thing we had to allow her to leave and that information would have helped," he said. "Whether it would have been sufficient or not remains to be seen."
Padilla wouldn't speak with me about this case but through a spokeswoman said, "I believe all family-court judges take domestic violence seriously, both personally and professionally."
He said he was saddened by what had happened, but didn't answer a question about whether it would change the way he does his job.
And that, I think, is maybe the saddest part.
Reach Roberts at laurie.roberts@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-8635.
Judging by what I read here, I am more convinced than ever that Judge Jose Padilla needs to be removed from the bench NOW. This buffoon basically sentenced Dawn Axsom to death by refusing to let her move away from her crazy abusive ex-boyfriend GABE SCHWARTZ, the father of her 2-year-old son. The son that Daddy Dearest, out of his great paternal compassion, ABANDONED at the murder scene. Now the judge is trying to back pedal and claim he didn't know the full story. Bull malarkey. Mom said plenty--if only the smug and idiotic judge had listened.
And it's f-----g unbelievable that the judge recommended that somebody with Dad's history of chronic unemployment, domestic violence, and mental illness (multiple suicide attempts, including one while with the child) "baby sit" while Mom is at work. And four days of (unsupervised) visitation a week? More proof that Padilla is a clueless moron who's a disgrace to the judiary.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2009/10/27/20091027roberts1028.htmlJudge failed to serve domestic-violence victims
by Laurie Roberts - Oct. 28, 2009 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
You cannot watch the grainy courtroom video and not want to punch something - the rewind button perhaps.
There is the woman, her head in her hands after asking a judge to let her leave the state yet not telling him why she needed to go. And there is the judge, pointing out that she can leave whenever she wants. She just can't take her 22-month-old son with her.
"If I permit the relocation, the relationship between dad and his son will forever be irreparably harmed and I will not permit that," Judge Jose Padilla said during an Oct. 6 hearing.
Ten days later, Peoria police say the child's father, 28-year-old Gabe Schwartz, shot and killed the child's mother and grandmother before killing himself, leaving the baby to fend for himself.
Dawn Axsom, her mother, Linda Braden, and their killer became Arizona's 93rd, 94th and 95th people to die as a result of domestic violence this year, according to the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
Dawn's father and stepmother are trying to come to grips with the deaths and with Padilla's decision to force her to stay. "Dawn believed she would be able to go," her stepmother, Kathy Axsom, told me. "I really think she had confidence in the system and obviously it failed her."
There is a lesson in the death of Dawn Axsom for the judges of this state. And for the many other Dawns out there, 30 of whom will be dead before the end of the year, if statistics hold true.
Axsom, 23, and Schwartz lived together briefly but by the time their son, Xavier, was 2 months old, Axsom was the only real parent. Family members and Axsom, in her testimony, said that Schwartz would baby-sit but that stopped after he overdosed on her grandmother's medication while alone with the boy. In July, Axsom filed for child support and he countered with a request for joint custody. A week later, court records indicate that he broke into Axsom's Peoria home and got into her bed. She awoke as he was taking off her clothes.
Axsom got an order of protection the next day.
Padilla knew about that order of protection on Oct. 6, but curiously, he asked no questions about their relationship. And Axsom never told the judge or even her attorney what was really going on, that Schwartz was threatening her, telling her he would never let her leave.
"My daughter was very strong but she was afraid of this man," Gary Axsom told me. "He had texted her so much that her hair was turning gray like mine."
I don't know why she didn't tell the judge, or her attorney, Ron Saper. Maybe it's because she thought she could handle it. Maybe it's because Schwartz was in the courtroom. Or maybe it's because she trusted the judge to get it right.
To listen when she testified that Schwartz had never been able to hold down a job and that he had tried to commit suicide several times, once while alone with their son. To hear her when she told him that Schwartz wasn't involved in the child's life and had never bought so much as a diaper. To remember that order of protection and to ask questions when Axsom testified that she and her mother wanted to move to Maryland to take care of an elderly family member. To consider the fact that this was her chance to go to school so that she could provide her son a better life.
Instead, the judge announced that the child would remain in Arizona for the time being to be near his dad. When Saper questioned how Axsom could realistically stay without the help of her mother, Padilla had a smug reply.
"Well, she doesn't have to remain here is the bottom line," he said.
Saper: "Well, she's not going to leave the child with him, your honor."
Padilla: "Well, again, that is her choice."
Padilla also offered a helpful suggestion. Schwartz, he said, could baby-sit while Axsom is at work, easing child-care expenses. He did order Schwartz to undergo mental-health and drug evaluations by January, but in the meantime ordered visitation four days a week, leaving me to wonder if there was something wrong with the video of the hearing that I was watching.
There was nothing wrong with the video, according to Elizabeth Ditlevson, of the Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Ditlevson said far too many judges don't take domestic violence seriously.
"Judge Padilla is part of the problem but he is not the problem," she said. "The problem is a system that allows judges to act like this and that is privileging abusers access to children over victim and child safety."
Saper said he can't take issue with Padilla's decision to keep the child here, given that neither he nor the judge knew the extent of the threats to Axsom. "I would have given the judge and I did give the judge every single thing we had to allow her to leave and that information would have helped," he said. "Whether it would have been sufficient or not remains to be seen."
Padilla wouldn't speak with me about this case but through a spokeswoman said, "I believe all family-court judges take domestic violence seriously, both personally and professionally."
He said he was saddened by what had happened, but didn't answer a question about whether it would change the way he does his job.
And that, I think, is maybe the saddest part.
Reach Roberts at laurie.roberts@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-8635.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Dad uses mom's moveaway hopes as an excuse for killing her (New Zealand)
Dad GREG MEADS uses Mom's supposed moveaway hopes as a excuse for murdering her. Or at least HIS dad does. Yea right, as if paternal love had everything to do with it. Guess the fact that he was stripping his 8-year-old daughter of her mother for LIFE wasn't a big deal for Dad though.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10599840
Dad: Murder accused upset over child
5:00AM Sunday Sep 27, 2009
By Carolyne Meng-Yee
Horseracing identity Greg Meads - charged with the murder of his wife - was allegedly pushed over the edge because of his belief that he would no longer see their daughter, says Meads' father.
"I think this all happened because Helen wanted to take [daughter] Sam away with her," Greg Meads' father, Howard, said last night.
"He just loved that little girl. I think that was the turning point ... I think that pushed him over the edge."
Howard Meads said his son had confided to him that the couple were having problems, and had agreed to separate.
He said his son had "got a house ready for her ... he was paying the bond on it that day". There were rumours that there were third parties involved. "She has been going out all night and coming home in the morning."
On Wednesday morning, police were called to the Meads' Waikato home and found the body of Helen. Greg Meads was later arrested and charged with her murder.
He had phoned his brother Phillip from the house.
"He just said, 'Helen is dead' ... and he kept crying," said Phillip Meads last night. "I was in shock. My mind went blank because I was trying to think what to do next."
Phillip Meads rushed to the scene, where police had already been called.
Howard Meads said there was more to the story, "don't you worry".
"He is very, very upset. The whole thing is so sad. Look, Greg is a lovely guy through and through. He never did anything to anybody - he's always helping people."
According to the Weekend Herald, Helen Meads had called a girlfriend on Wednesday, excited about moving on with her life.
She and Greg Meads had been married 10 years and had one daughter, Sam, 8. Helen Meads had two older children from a previous marriage.
A friend of Helen Meads, trainer Phil Stevens, met her about 10 years ago. "She's one of those people, if you met her today, tomorrow, you'd feel like you'd known her for 10 years. Life was a good time for Helen," he told the Weekend Herald.
Another friend said she "didn't have an enemy in the world".
The Meads were a well-known racing couple and trained horses together. Among racehorses they owned were Kristov, Ginga Dude and Wolf Pack.
Howard Meads said he had yet to see his son.
"Greg looked very gaunt and worried [in court]," said Howard Meads. "it's very upsetting because we can't go and talk to him or anything. He is my son and it is very hard."
Meads will reappear in the Hamilton District Court next month.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10599840
Dad: Murder accused upset over child
5:00AM Sunday Sep 27, 2009
By Carolyne Meng-Yee
Horseracing identity Greg Meads - charged with the murder of his wife - was allegedly pushed over the edge because of his belief that he would no longer see their daughter, says Meads' father.
"I think this all happened because Helen wanted to take [daughter] Sam away with her," Greg Meads' father, Howard, said last night.
"He just loved that little girl. I think that was the turning point ... I think that pushed him over the edge."
Howard Meads said his son had confided to him that the couple were having problems, and had agreed to separate.
He said his son had "got a house ready for her ... he was paying the bond on it that day". There were rumours that there were third parties involved. "She has been going out all night and coming home in the morning."
On Wednesday morning, police were called to the Meads' Waikato home and found the body of Helen. Greg Meads was later arrested and charged with her murder.
He had phoned his brother Phillip from the house.
"He just said, 'Helen is dead' ... and he kept crying," said Phillip Meads last night. "I was in shock. My mind went blank because I was trying to think what to do next."
Phillip Meads rushed to the scene, where police had already been called.
Howard Meads said there was more to the story, "don't you worry".
"He is very, very upset. The whole thing is so sad. Look, Greg is a lovely guy through and through. He never did anything to anybody - he's always helping people."
According to the Weekend Herald, Helen Meads had called a girlfriend on Wednesday, excited about moving on with her life.
She and Greg Meads had been married 10 years and had one daughter, Sam, 8. Helen Meads had two older children from a previous marriage.
A friend of Helen Meads, trainer Phil Stevens, met her about 10 years ago. "She's one of those people, if you met her today, tomorrow, you'd feel like you'd known her for 10 years. Life was a good time for Helen," he told the Weekend Herald.
Another friend said she "didn't have an enemy in the world".
The Meads were a well-known racing couple and trained horses together. Among racehorses they owned were Kristov, Ginga Dude and Wolf Pack.
Howard Meads said he had yet to see his son.
"Greg looked very gaunt and worried [in court]," said Howard Meads. "it's very upsetting because we can't go and talk to him or anything. He is my son and it is very hard."
Meads will reappear in the Hamilton District Court next month.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Dad murders mom during scheduled custody exchange; he "exploded" because she wanted to move away (Mays Landing, New Jersey)
Dad LOUIS CERESA has been convicted of killing his ex-wife, the mother of his five children, during a scheduled custody exchange. Dad "exploded" when Mom said she wanted to move away. She was strangled to death in front of their 11-year-old son.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/press/atlantic/article_f0c0f0da-a462-11de-87cb-001cc4c002e0.html
Northfield man gets 15 years for killing mother of his five children
Story By LYNDA COHEN Staff Writer
Posted: Friday, September 18, 2009
MAYS LANDING - Friday used to be the day Louis Ceresa took his five children out for pizza.
But this Friday, instead of picking them up, the Northfield man was sentenced to 15 years in prison for killing their mother.
Ceresa admitted in July that he strangled Amanda Carmen, 34, while the two sat in her minivan outside his Revere Avenue home during a scheduled custody exchange Jan. 11.
Superior Court Judge Bernard DeLury called the plea agreement's recommended 15-year sentence "lenient," but said that Ceresa's willingness to admit his guilt spared his children from a painful trial and his eldest from having to testify in court.
The couple's 11-year-old son witnessed the killing.
"I can't tell you what I did that night or why I did it," Ceresa, 33, told the judge Friday. "I don't know what happened."
When he pleaded to aggravated manslaughter in July, Ceresa said "I exploded" after Carmen told him she was moving away with their children.
"I didn't mean for this to happen," he said at the time.
"To lose a child, at any age, from illness or accident is horrific," Carmen's mother, Margaret, said in a statement read in court by victim counselor Trisha Hayek. "But to lose her because someone was angry and just 'didn't mean to kill her' is unbearable."
Now, Carmen's children will not have their mother with them for all the important things in life, she said: "What Louis did will have an effect on our family not just now, but also for generations to come."
"I have no excuse for what I did," Ceresa said.
He apologized to his children - who were not in court - as well as the dozen family members there to support him. He also apologized to the Carmens, explaining, "they were my family for many years."
And once again, as he had when he pleaded, Ceresa professed his love for Carmen.
"Louis claims he loved Amanda," Margaret Carmen wrote. "How do you put your hands around the throat of someone you love and watch them take their last breath of life? How is his defense, 'I didn't mean to'?"
But defense attorney Anthony Previti said the killing was an anomaly, and Ceresa is a good man who has shown consistent remorse since the killing.
Previti said Ceresa asked that nothing positive be said about him in court, "but I am compelled to say it."
"I don't feel like a good person," Ceresa said. "I do feel rotten. I do feel like crap, and I should. I'll make sure I come down on myself for the rest of my life."
For at least the next 12 years, that life will be in prison. He must serve 85 percent of the imposed sentence before he is eligible for parole.
By that time, the victim's mother said, the children "will have the time to grow up and understand the situation and how they feel about it."
She said she would like to see Ceresa spend the rest of his life in jail, but the family accepted the plea deal to spare her 11-year-old grandson "the agony of having seen his mother strangled to death by his father and then have to testify and put his father in prison."
It is more time than the nine years Millville police Sgt. Robert Vanaman received after admitting during jury selection for his murder trial in March that he killed his wife and tried to cover up the crime in 2006.
In August, DeLury sentenced Rosina McKinnie to nine years in prison under a plea agreement in which she admitted to fatally stabbing her live-in boyfriend Aramis Smith during a 2008 party at the couple's Pleasantville home. There was a history of domestic violence against McKinnie in that case.
Previti told DeLury on Friday how the judge often said domestic violence cases are one step away from homicide. But in this case, "there was no warning," Previti said.
Police had not broken up fights between the two. Ceresa had no criminal background.
"I don't believe he's even had a parking ticket," Previti said.
But there was daily alcohol consumption and a history of cocaine use, DeLury pointed out.
"This defendant was not entirely a law-abiding person, as evidence by his frequent (drug) abuse."
Ceresa relinquished his parental rights. The children, ages 5 to 11, now live with their maternal grandmother in Egg Harbor Township.
"I lost my children. I lost Amanda. I lost everything over something stupid," Ceresa told the judge. "When I die, I'll pay for this again. I'll be judged again."
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/press/atlantic/article_f0c0f0da-a462-11de-87cb-001cc4c002e0.html
Northfield man gets 15 years for killing mother of his five children
Story By LYNDA COHEN Staff Writer
Posted: Friday, September 18, 2009
MAYS LANDING - Friday used to be the day Louis Ceresa took his five children out for pizza.
But this Friday, instead of picking them up, the Northfield man was sentenced to 15 years in prison for killing their mother.
Ceresa admitted in July that he strangled Amanda Carmen, 34, while the two sat in her minivan outside his Revere Avenue home during a scheduled custody exchange Jan. 11.
Superior Court Judge Bernard DeLury called the plea agreement's recommended 15-year sentence "lenient," but said that Ceresa's willingness to admit his guilt spared his children from a painful trial and his eldest from having to testify in court.
The couple's 11-year-old son witnessed the killing.
"I can't tell you what I did that night or why I did it," Ceresa, 33, told the judge Friday. "I don't know what happened."
When he pleaded to aggravated manslaughter in July, Ceresa said "I exploded" after Carmen told him she was moving away with their children.
"I didn't mean for this to happen," he said at the time.
"To lose a child, at any age, from illness or accident is horrific," Carmen's mother, Margaret, said in a statement read in court by victim counselor Trisha Hayek. "But to lose her because someone was angry and just 'didn't mean to kill her' is unbearable."
Now, Carmen's children will not have their mother with them for all the important things in life, she said: "What Louis did will have an effect on our family not just now, but also for generations to come."
"I have no excuse for what I did," Ceresa said.
He apologized to his children - who were not in court - as well as the dozen family members there to support him. He also apologized to the Carmens, explaining, "they were my family for many years."
And once again, as he had when he pleaded, Ceresa professed his love for Carmen.
"Louis claims he loved Amanda," Margaret Carmen wrote. "How do you put your hands around the throat of someone you love and watch them take their last breath of life? How is his defense, 'I didn't mean to'?"
But defense attorney Anthony Previti said the killing was an anomaly, and Ceresa is a good man who has shown consistent remorse since the killing.
Previti said Ceresa asked that nothing positive be said about him in court, "but I am compelled to say it."
"I don't feel like a good person," Ceresa said. "I do feel rotten. I do feel like crap, and I should. I'll make sure I come down on myself for the rest of my life."
For at least the next 12 years, that life will be in prison. He must serve 85 percent of the imposed sentence before he is eligible for parole.
By that time, the victim's mother said, the children "will have the time to grow up and understand the situation and how they feel about it."
She said she would like to see Ceresa spend the rest of his life in jail, but the family accepted the plea deal to spare her 11-year-old grandson "the agony of having seen his mother strangled to death by his father and then have to testify and put his father in prison."
It is more time than the nine years Millville police Sgt. Robert Vanaman received after admitting during jury selection for his murder trial in March that he killed his wife and tried to cover up the crime in 2006.
In August, DeLury sentenced Rosina McKinnie to nine years in prison under a plea agreement in which she admitted to fatally stabbing her live-in boyfriend Aramis Smith during a 2008 party at the couple's Pleasantville home. There was a history of domestic violence against McKinnie in that case.
Previti told DeLury on Friday how the judge often said domestic violence cases are one step away from homicide. But in this case, "there was no warning," Previti said.
Police had not broken up fights between the two. Ceresa had no criminal background.
"I don't believe he's even had a parking ticket," Previti said.
But there was daily alcohol consumption and a history of cocaine use, DeLury pointed out.
"This defendant was not entirely a law-abiding person, as evidence by his frequent (drug) abuse."
Ceresa relinquished his parental rights. The children, ages 5 to 11, now live with their maternal grandmother in Egg Harbor Township.
"I lost my children. I lost Amanda. I lost everything over something stupid," Ceresa told the judge. "When I die, I'll pay for this again. I'll be judged again."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)