Dad is identified as CODY BROWN.
http://www.jconline.com/story/news/2015/08/14/frankfort-infant-death/31715749/
Frankfort infant dies from shaken baby syndrome
Hannah Smith Kiefer, 3:07 p.m. EDT August 14, 2015
Frankfort police have arrested the father of a 6-week-old infant who died Thursday of shaken baby syndrome.
Cody Brown, 20, was arrested Friday on preliminary felony charges of neglect of a dependent resulting in death and battery resulting in death to a person less than 14 years of age.
Frankfort police Chief Troy Bacon said in a press release that Detective Wesley Hickson responded on July 26 to Riley Hospital for Children in Indianapolis to investigate a report of a Frankfort infant with a severe head injury. The baby had been transferred from St. Vincent Hospital in Frankfort.
Authorities learned Thursday the infant had died from the injuries.
Brown is in custody at Clinton County Jail awaiting formal charges, according to the release.
Monday, August 17, 2015
How abusive dad got custody in seven minutes (Worcester, Massachusetts)
The ONLY reason such a travesty could have taken place is the utter triumph of Fathers Rights in the family court system. Fathers are coddled and indulged despite histories of domestic violence, severe mental illness, drugs/alcohol abuse, evidence of child abuse...none of it matters in terms of gaining and retaining custody.
We've reported on custodial dad RANDALL LINTS before.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/15/seven-minutes-that-sealed-boy-fate/lLqEG1IEo4aDzBbFEZFXfI/story.html
7 minutes that set a child’s course for tragedy
Hearing that gave a Hardwick boy to father who allegedly beat and starved him was terse, incurious, disastrous
By Michael Levenson Globe Staff August 15, 2015
WORCESTER — It took seven minutes of rustling papers and perfunctory questions uttered in rapid-fire monotone, and the deal was done. A Worcester probate judge had transferred custody of a young boy from the grandmother who had raised him almost since birth to the father whom he barely knew. A year later, the father would be charged with nearly killing the boy by beating him and refusing him food and water.
Even though family members now say that the father had a history of violence and mental illness, and though he had only recently acknowledged that he was the father, Judge Lucille A. DiLeo never questioned Randall Lints’s fitness to raise his son.
And no party to the case suggested she should.
“OK, I think we have everything,” DiLeo said in a matter-of-fact voice, after reading aloud the main points of the custody papers, and ensuring that they had been signed by the father, mother, and grandmother standing before her. “Thank you, everybody.”
Legal experts say such quick approval is typical in cases like this one.
There was no dispute over the father’s petition for custody, because the family members had signed it before the brief hearing on June 30, 2014, a recording of which was obtained by the Globe. The judge simply ratified the family consensus. There was no one in court to speak specifically for the child.
The tragic fallout from the custody ruling has raised questions about whether probate courts can do more to protect the children whose lives their decisions most deeply affect. ‘They’re all standing there, they all agree, they all signed off on it, and that’s it.’
“We must reform our probate and family courts so that, in every case, the interests of children outweigh the desires and preferences of adults,” said Gail Garinger, a former juvenile court judge who heads the state Office of the Child Advocate. “Children in our courts need experienced professionals who will listen to them and help identify their genuine needs, skilled advocates for their interests, and decision-makers who will make the welfare of the children before them their highest priority.”
Other legal specialists, even as they acknowledge the horrors allegedly inflicted by Lints, recoil at the notion that judges should intervene in cases in which an entire family is in agreement about who should gain custody.
“The idea that the state gets to tell you whether you have it together enough to bring up your child is really a little bit scary,” said Mary E. O’Connell, a professor of child and family law at Northeastern University School of Law.
Indeed, in a custody case that is not disputed, the judge must presume that the adults have the child’s best interests at heart, said Edward M. Ginsburg, a retired probate court judge who served 25 years in Middlesex County.
“In this case, there is nothing that the judge should have done that she didn’t do: They’re all standing there, they all agree, they all signed off on it, and that’s it,” Ginsburg said. “In that context, it’s an administrative function.”
The 7-year-old boy has been in a coma since July 14, when paramedics carried him from Lints’s home in Hardwick with bruises across his body and burns on his feet.
He weighed just 38 pounds, having lost 12 to 15 pounds in recent weeks. Authorities say Lints had kept his son in his bedroom and starved and dehydrated him to stop him from urinating on the floor.
The case has focused intense scrutiny on the state Department of Children and Families, which had been monitoring the boy since February when it received back-to-back complaints that Lints was neglecting the child.
Officials have acknowledged that a state social worker visited the home just two weeks before the boy fell into a coma and his father called 911.
A year earlier, DiLeo had made what would turn out to be the fateful decision to transfer custody of the boy. In court, she ticked off the nuts and bolts of the deal: The maternal grandmother, who had been the boy’s legal guardian since 2008, would hand custody to Lints, 26.
Reading from the agreement, she confirmed his promise to enroll the boy in counseling and add him to his Medicaid plan. She affirmed the visitation rights of the boy’s mother, Amber Loiselle, who had been estranged from her son for two years.
No one present raised any objections that might have prompted DiLeo to question the arrangement. The judge sealed the deal with a series of questions to each family member.
“Did you sign here? Did you review it with your lawyer before you signed it? Understood it? Signed it freely and voluntarily?” And, finally, “Thank you.”
DiLeo could have appointed an attorney for the child or an independent advocate, called a guardian ad litem, to assess whether placing him with the father was in the boy’s best interests, said Sanford N. Katz, a professor emeritus at Boston College Law School and a specialist in family law.
“The focus of the case has to be on the child, not on the parents or anybody else,” Katz said. “Even though all the parties may agree the father is the one, an independent look at this might say no.”
DiLeo did not respond to several messages.
Still, it would have been highly unusual for her to intervene when there was no dispute over custody, said Robin M. Deutsch, the director of the Center of Excellence for Children, Families and the Law at William James College in Newton.
“If people don’t bring forward a concern, it’s really not up to the court to go on a fishing expedition,” Deutsch said. “It would be very inappropriate to say, ‘Wait a moment. Let’s get an evaluation.’ Instead, you say, ‘How great that they agreed; how wonderful.’ ”
If DiLeo had scrutinized the case, she might have discovered cause for concern.
In 2007, when Lints was first told that he was going to be a father, “He would call me and threaten to cut [the baby] out of my stomach,” Amber Loiselle told the Globe last month.
A year later, a judge in Fitchburg granted Loiselle a restraining order against Lints after he allegedly shoved her to the ground. Lints was not listed on the boy’s birth certificate, and the boy was told that his father was dead, according to relatives.
Lints only became involved in his son’s life in 2013, after he was sued by the state to provide child support and was ordered to take a paternity test, court records show.
Lints’s mother, Tina LaValley, said she warned her son, who has bipolar disorder and borderline schizophrenia, not to seek custody of the boy.
“I says, ‘You don’t want to put yourself in that situation,’ ” LaValley told NECN. “[He said], ‘I don’t want nobody calling me a deadbeat dad. I’m not going to be a deadbeat dad. That is my son. I’m going to raise my son.’ ”
We've reported on custodial dad RANDALL LINTS before.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/15/seven-minutes-that-sealed-boy-fate/lLqEG1IEo4aDzBbFEZFXfI/story.html
7 minutes that set a child’s course for tragedy
Hearing that gave a Hardwick boy to father who allegedly beat and starved him was terse, incurious, disastrous
By Michael Levenson Globe Staff August 15, 2015
WORCESTER — It took seven minutes of rustling papers and perfunctory questions uttered in rapid-fire monotone, and the deal was done. A Worcester probate judge had transferred custody of a young boy from the grandmother who had raised him almost since birth to the father whom he barely knew. A year later, the father would be charged with nearly killing the boy by beating him and refusing him food and water.
Even though family members now say that the father had a history of violence and mental illness, and though he had only recently acknowledged that he was the father, Judge Lucille A. DiLeo never questioned Randall Lints’s fitness to raise his son.
And no party to the case suggested she should.
“OK, I think we have everything,” DiLeo said in a matter-of-fact voice, after reading aloud the main points of the custody papers, and ensuring that they had been signed by the father, mother, and grandmother standing before her. “Thank you, everybody.”
Legal experts say such quick approval is typical in cases like this one.
There was no dispute over the father’s petition for custody, because the family members had signed it before the brief hearing on June 30, 2014, a recording of which was obtained by the Globe. The judge simply ratified the family consensus. There was no one in court to speak specifically for the child.
The tragic fallout from the custody ruling has raised questions about whether probate courts can do more to protect the children whose lives their decisions most deeply affect. ‘They’re all standing there, they all agree, they all signed off on it, and that’s it.’
“We must reform our probate and family courts so that, in every case, the interests of children outweigh the desires and preferences of adults,” said Gail Garinger, a former juvenile court judge who heads the state Office of the Child Advocate. “Children in our courts need experienced professionals who will listen to them and help identify their genuine needs, skilled advocates for their interests, and decision-makers who will make the welfare of the children before them their highest priority.”
Other legal specialists, even as they acknowledge the horrors allegedly inflicted by Lints, recoil at the notion that judges should intervene in cases in which an entire family is in agreement about who should gain custody.
“The idea that the state gets to tell you whether you have it together enough to bring up your child is really a little bit scary,” said Mary E. O’Connell, a professor of child and family law at Northeastern University School of Law.
Indeed, in a custody case that is not disputed, the judge must presume that the adults have the child’s best interests at heart, said Edward M. Ginsburg, a retired probate court judge who served 25 years in Middlesex County.
“In this case, there is nothing that the judge should have done that she didn’t do: They’re all standing there, they all agree, they all signed off on it, and that’s it,” Ginsburg said. “In that context, it’s an administrative function.”
The 7-year-old boy has been in a coma since July 14, when paramedics carried him from Lints’s home in Hardwick with bruises across his body and burns on his feet.
He weighed just 38 pounds, having lost 12 to 15 pounds in recent weeks. Authorities say Lints had kept his son in his bedroom and starved and dehydrated him to stop him from urinating on the floor.
The case has focused intense scrutiny on the state Department of Children and Families, which had been monitoring the boy since February when it received back-to-back complaints that Lints was neglecting the child.
Officials have acknowledged that a state social worker visited the home just two weeks before the boy fell into a coma and his father called 911.
A year earlier, DiLeo had made what would turn out to be the fateful decision to transfer custody of the boy. In court, she ticked off the nuts and bolts of the deal: The maternal grandmother, who had been the boy’s legal guardian since 2008, would hand custody to Lints, 26.
Reading from the agreement, she confirmed his promise to enroll the boy in counseling and add him to his Medicaid plan. She affirmed the visitation rights of the boy’s mother, Amber Loiselle, who had been estranged from her son for two years.
No one present raised any objections that might have prompted DiLeo to question the arrangement. The judge sealed the deal with a series of questions to each family member.
“Did you sign here? Did you review it with your lawyer before you signed it? Understood it? Signed it freely and voluntarily?” And, finally, “Thank you.”
DiLeo could have appointed an attorney for the child or an independent advocate, called a guardian ad litem, to assess whether placing him with the father was in the boy’s best interests, said Sanford N. Katz, a professor emeritus at Boston College Law School and a specialist in family law.
“The focus of the case has to be on the child, not on the parents or anybody else,” Katz said. “Even though all the parties may agree the father is the one, an independent look at this might say no.”
DiLeo did not respond to several messages.
Still, it would have been highly unusual for her to intervene when there was no dispute over custody, said Robin M. Deutsch, the director of the Center of Excellence for Children, Families and the Law at William James College in Newton.
“If people don’t bring forward a concern, it’s really not up to the court to go on a fishing expedition,” Deutsch said. “It would be very inappropriate to say, ‘Wait a moment. Let’s get an evaluation.’ Instead, you say, ‘How great that they agreed; how wonderful.’ ”
If DiLeo had scrutinized the case, she might have discovered cause for concern.
In 2007, when Lints was first told that he was going to be a father, “He would call me and threaten to cut [the baby] out of my stomach,” Amber Loiselle told the Globe last month.
A year later, a judge in Fitchburg granted Loiselle a restraining order against Lints after he allegedly shoved her to the ground. Lints was not listed on the boy’s birth certificate, and the boy was told that his father was dead, according to relatives.
Lints only became involved in his son’s life in 2013, after he was sued by the state to provide child support and was ordered to take a paternity test, court records show.
Lints’s mother, Tina LaValley, said she warned her son, who has bipolar disorder and borderline schizophrenia, not to seek custody of the boy.
“I says, ‘You don’t want to put yourself in that situation,’ ” LaValley told NECN. “[He said], ‘I don’t want nobody calling me a deadbeat dad. I’m not going to be a deadbeat dad. That is my son. I’m going to raise my son.’ ”
Dad charged with manslaughter in death of 3-month-old son (Syracuse, New York)
Dad is identified as FELIPE LEBRON. We've posted on this case before.
http://www.syracuse.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/08/syracuse_dad_accused_of_killing_3-month-old_son_i_just_totally_lost_control.html
Syracuse dad accused of killing 3-month-old son: 'I just totally lost control'
By Douglass Dowty on August 07, 2015 at 1:46 PM, updated August 07, 2015 at 3:05 PM
Syracuse, NY -- A Syracuse man accused of killing his 3-month-old boy admitted to police he shook the baby after losing control.
Felipe Lebron, 26, tried to revive his unconscious child before calling 911, he said in a statement. Lebron was charged with manslaughter in Anthony Lebron's death in January.
"l lost control and I know I (screwed) up," Lebron wrote in his statement. "I need to work on my patience and my control."
Lebron said he was uncomfortable and irritated when he picked the baby up and "whipped" his head hard. The baby suffered whiplash, he said.
Lebron then tried to provide aid to his son before calling 911. The father was originally charged with reckless assault of a child before Anthony died a week later. The baby's injuries included bleeding in the brain, pointing to a "shaken baby" death.
But Lebron's lawyer, Ed Klein, suggested that Lebron's admission might not hold up in court. Klein questioned whether Lebron was forced into providing his statement by police, who said he wasn't free to leave an interrogation room.
Lebron was emotional and pleaded to see his son. Detective Clark Farry told Lebron what was most important was getting him back to his family and getting information for doctors.
Farry acknowledged he strategically tried to reassure Lebron about his child's condition so he could get a statement from him about what happened.
Lebron agreed to waive his Constitutional rights and speak to Farry. At the end of a two-hour interview, Lebron signed the statement about what happened.
But Klein argued that Lebron was improperly forced into the interrogation by an officer driving him to police headquarters from the hospital, where his son was taken.
That officer was not available for questioning in court today. The hearing was delayed until Aug. 26.
After the hearing concludes, County Court Judge Anthony Aloi will decide if Lebron's confession can be used against him at trial.
http://www.syracuse.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/08/syracuse_dad_accused_of_killing_3-month-old_son_i_just_totally_lost_control.html
Syracuse dad accused of killing 3-month-old son: 'I just totally lost control'
By Douglass Dowty on August 07, 2015 at 1:46 PM, updated August 07, 2015 at 3:05 PM
Syracuse, NY -- A Syracuse man accused of killing his 3-month-old boy admitted to police he shook the baby after losing control.
Felipe Lebron, 26, tried to revive his unconscious child before calling 911, he said in a statement. Lebron was charged with manslaughter in Anthony Lebron's death in January.
"l lost control and I know I (screwed) up," Lebron wrote in his statement. "I need to work on my patience and my control."
Lebron said he was uncomfortable and irritated when he picked the baby up and "whipped" his head hard. The baby suffered whiplash, he said.
Lebron then tried to provide aid to his son before calling 911. The father was originally charged with reckless assault of a child before Anthony died a week later. The baby's injuries included bleeding in the brain, pointing to a "shaken baby" death.
But Lebron's lawyer, Ed Klein, suggested that Lebron's admission might not hold up in court. Klein questioned whether Lebron was forced into providing his statement by police, who said he wasn't free to leave an interrogation room.
Lebron was emotional and pleaded to see his son. Detective Clark Farry told Lebron what was most important was getting him back to his family and getting information for doctors.
Farry acknowledged he strategically tried to reassure Lebron about his child's condition so he could get a statement from him about what happened.
Lebron agreed to waive his Constitutional rights and speak to Farry. At the end of a two-hour interview, Lebron signed the statement about what happened.
But Klein argued that Lebron was improperly forced into the interrogation by an officer driving him to police headquarters from the hospital, where his son was taken.
That officer was not available for questioning in court today. The hearing was delayed until Aug. 26.
After the hearing concludes, County Court Judge Anthony Aloi will decide if Lebron's confession can be used against him at trial.
Dad arrested for killing 9-month-old son (Silsbee, Texas)
After Daddy beat an elderly relative, she should have been kept in jail. He certainly shouldn't have been allowed around babies.
Dad is identified as DONNY DOMINIQUE RATCLIFF.
http://www.khou.com/story/news/crime/2015/08/07/father-arrested-9-month-old-sons-death/31324773/
Father arrested in 9-month-old son's death
KBMT-TV, Beaumont 9:27 p.m. CDT August 7, 2015
SILSBEE -- A spokesperson for the Silsbee Police Department Friday said a father was arrested in connection with the Feb. 13 death his 9-month-old son.
Donny Dominique Ratcliff, 42, is charged in the death of his child Donatello Ratcliff. Detectives said Ratcliff confessed to the crime, saying he suffocated the baby with his hands after the infant would not stop crying.
Detectives said Ratcliff told them he did not use a weapon -- only his bare hands.
A statement issued by police says Silsbee officers in February were called to the Tiger Village Trailer Park, located in the 1300 block of Robinson Road, to Trailer# 41, to investigate a report of an unresponsive child. The child was taken to a Beaumont hospital where he was subsequently pronounced dead. An autopsy was ordered and the results indicated the child died from asphyxia.
The investigation led officers to suspect the father had intentionally caused the death of the child.
Police say Ratcliff confessed on Aug. 6. They say he has since cooperated with authorities.
Ratcliff was formally charged Friday with capital murder of a child under 10 years of age. He has been arraigned by Hardin County Justice of the Peace Chris Ingram, who set bond at $825,000.
Ratcliff was already in jail for several months because detectives said after the baby's death, Ratcliff beat an elderly relative of his wife's.
Ratcliff is currently being held in the Hardin County Jail.
Silsbee is about about 30 minutes north of Beaumont.
Dad is identified as DONNY DOMINIQUE RATCLIFF.
http://www.khou.com/story/news/crime/2015/08/07/father-arrested-9-month-old-sons-death/31324773/
Father arrested in 9-month-old son's death
KBMT-TV, Beaumont 9:27 p.m. CDT August 7, 2015
SILSBEE -- A spokesperson for the Silsbee Police Department Friday said a father was arrested in connection with the Feb. 13 death his 9-month-old son.
Donny Dominique Ratcliff, 42, is charged in the death of his child Donatello Ratcliff. Detectives said Ratcliff confessed to the crime, saying he suffocated the baby with his hands after the infant would not stop crying.
Detectives said Ratcliff told them he did not use a weapon -- only his bare hands.
A statement issued by police says Silsbee officers in February were called to the Tiger Village Trailer Park, located in the 1300 block of Robinson Road, to Trailer# 41, to investigate a report of an unresponsive child. The child was taken to a Beaumont hospital where he was subsequently pronounced dead. An autopsy was ordered and the results indicated the child died from asphyxia.
The investigation led officers to suspect the father had intentionally caused the death of the child.
Police say Ratcliff confessed on Aug. 6. They say he has since cooperated with authorities.
Ratcliff was formally charged Friday with capital murder of a child under 10 years of age. He has been arraigned by Hardin County Justice of the Peace Chris Ingram, who set bond at $825,000.
Ratcliff was already in jail for several months because detectives said after the baby's death, Ratcliff beat an elderly relative of his wife's.
Ratcliff is currently being held in the Hardin County Jail.
Silsbee is about about 30 minutes north of Beaumont.
What drives a dad to murder his sons? (Australia)
We've reported on killer dad ROBERT FARQUHARSON before.
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/what-drives-a-dad-to-murder-his-sons/story-fnu2q5nu-1227475281984
What drives a dad to murder his sons?
This story was published: 10 days ago August 08, 2015 12:16PM
NO ONE saw it coming. To friends and family Robert Farquharson was “poor Rob”, a short, chubby, unassuming and not overly bright country bloke who moped around the small Victorian town of Winchelsea after his wife left him.
Farquharson had appeared to be coping with the separation and getting on with his life. Then his car veered off the highway near town into a large dam, 10 years ago this Father’s Day. He escaped unhurt but his sons, Jai, 10, Tyler, 7, and Bailey, 2, drowned.
When it emerged that this was no accident, friends and family were stunned. Even his estranged wife, Cindy Gambino, refused to believe that the seemingly meek and mild Farquharson was capable of murder.
It wasn’t until Farquharson’s second trial, which again found him guilty, that Cindy finally accepted that Farquharson had intentionally killed all of their children. Some Winchelsea locals still believe it was a tragic accident.
We all struggle to understand when someone who appears “normal” commits such a cold-blooded act. Robert Farquharson was the archetypal country bumpkin who worked as a labourer with the local council, volunteered at the local school and enjoyed hanging out with children.
The idea of his leaving his boys to drown was incomprehensible. But when you consider Farquharson’s personality disorder and background, it is not so surprising.
The youngest of four children, Farquharson was small for his age and grew up protected by siblings and his late mother, Faye. Genetic factors also appear to have contributed to his developing an avoidant personality disorder (AvPD).
An AvPD is a pervasive pattern of behaviour characterised by social inhibition and lack of social confidence, feelings of inadequacy and hypersensitivity to negative evaluation.
Farquharson couldn’t cope with adult responsibility. He mocked and antagonised his family, publicly lost his temper when he could not work machinery or tools, and let Cindy do most of the work and make most of the decisions. He used her as a protective shield.
When Cindy asked him to leave, Farquharson moved in with his father, seeking sympathy from many locals and blaming her for the marriage breakdown.
Outwardly he was moving on, but inwardly Farquharson seethed. Due to his AvPD he chose to be dependent on Cindy, but this also made him resentful. When she befriended another man, his rage quietly grew to the point where he plotted one of the world’s worst cases of family violence.
As this terrible tragedy showed, domestic violence is complex and many factors can contribute. Personality disorders often play a significant role and most people don’t realise how dangerous some people with one of these entrenched behaviour patterns can be.
Gerard Baden-Clay is another classic case of a murderer with a personality disorder. The Brisbane real estate agent appeared to be the perfect husband, father and small businessman — until he killed his wife, Allison, in April, 2012.
A great-grandson of Scouts founder Lord Robert Baden-Powell, Baden-Clay was president of the Kenmore Chamber of Commerce, ran Scout groups, supported the local school’s chaplaincy program and doted on his three daughters.
He actively promoted an image of himself as a successful and upstanding businessman, but it was far removed from the reality of his life. When Baden-Clay was charged with Allison’s murder, most Australians were stunned. But they shouldn’t have been.
Privately, Baden-Clay had spent years deliberately chipping away at Allison’s confidence, cheating with multiple women, big-noting himself in business and borrowing big money from friends when his franchise began to fail and incur massive debts.
His narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) meant he felt justified in fabricating a false image and doing or taking what he wanted, even if it hurt others.
An NPD is a pervasive pattern of behaviour characterised by an excessive need for admiration, inflated views of oneself not backed up by reality, exploitation of others, a strong sense of entitlement and marked arrogance.
Baden-Clay displayed these characteristics and was not as clever as he thought. His story that Allison had wandered off overnight, ending up in a creek 13 kilometres away, was unconvincing and he was convicted of her murder in 2014.
Yesterday lawyers for Baden-Clay argued that his conviction for the murder of his wife should be quashed on the grounds it was ‘unreasonable’. The three judges will give a written judgment, expected within three months.
Simon Gittany also had a false exterior masking something much more sinister — in his case an anti-social personality disorder (ASPD). An ASPD is a pervasive pattern of behaviour characterised by a disregard for and violation of the rights of other people coupled with a lack of remorse.
In public Gittany played the loving partner of his Canadian fiancee, Lisa Harnum. But he had a long criminal record for assault, theft and drug-dealing. He secretly spied on Lisa, controlled her every move and alienated her from her friends and her family in Canada.
When Lisa tried to leave in July, 2011, Gittany threw her from the balcony of their fifteenth floor Sydney CBD apartment and claimed she had suddenly climbed over. Judge Lucy McCallum disagreed and found him guilty of murder.
These perpetrators all had a personality disorder and their dysfunctional pattern of behaviour towards their partners was rigid, lacking in empathy and focused only on their own needs. In each case the results were deadly.
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/what-drives-a-dad-to-murder-his-sons/story-fnu2q5nu-1227475281984
What drives a dad to murder his sons?
This story was published: 10 days ago August 08, 2015 12:16PM
NO ONE saw it coming. To friends and family Robert Farquharson was “poor Rob”, a short, chubby, unassuming and not overly bright country bloke who moped around the small Victorian town of Winchelsea after his wife left him.
Farquharson had appeared to be coping with the separation and getting on with his life. Then his car veered off the highway near town into a large dam, 10 years ago this Father’s Day. He escaped unhurt but his sons, Jai, 10, Tyler, 7, and Bailey, 2, drowned.
When it emerged that this was no accident, friends and family were stunned. Even his estranged wife, Cindy Gambino, refused to believe that the seemingly meek and mild Farquharson was capable of murder.
It wasn’t until Farquharson’s second trial, which again found him guilty, that Cindy finally accepted that Farquharson had intentionally killed all of their children. Some Winchelsea locals still believe it was a tragic accident.
We all struggle to understand when someone who appears “normal” commits such a cold-blooded act. Robert Farquharson was the archetypal country bumpkin who worked as a labourer with the local council, volunteered at the local school and enjoyed hanging out with children.
The idea of his leaving his boys to drown was incomprehensible. But when you consider Farquharson’s personality disorder and background, it is not so surprising.
The youngest of four children, Farquharson was small for his age and grew up protected by siblings and his late mother, Faye. Genetic factors also appear to have contributed to his developing an avoidant personality disorder (AvPD).
An AvPD is a pervasive pattern of behaviour characterised by social inhibition and lack of social confidence, feelings of inadequacy and hypersensitivity to negative evaluation.
Farquharson couldn’t cope with adult responsibility. He mocked and antagonised his family, publicly lost his temper when he could not work machinery or tools, and let Cindy do most of the work and make most of the decisions. He used her as a protective shield.
When Cindy asked him to leave, Farquharson moved in with his father, seeking sympathy from many locals and blaming her for the marriage breakdown.
Outwardly he was moving on, but inwardly Farquharson seethed. Due to his AvPD he chose to be dependent on Cindy, but this also made him resentful. When she befriended another man, his rage quietly grew to the point where he plotted one of the world’s worst cases of family violence.
As this terrible tragedy showed, domestic violence is complex and many factors can contribute. Personality disorders often play a significant role and most people don’t realise how dangerous some people with one of these entrenched behaviour patterns can be.
Gerard Baden-Clay is another classic case of a murderer with a personality disorder. The Brisbane real estate agent appeared to be the perfect husband, father and small businessman — until he killed his wife, Allison, in April, 2012.
A great-grandson of Scouts founder Lord Robert Baden-Powell, Baden-Clay was president of the Kenmore Chamber of Commerce, ran Scout groups, supported the local school’s chaplaincy program and doted on his three daughters.
He actively promoted an image of himself as a successful and upstanding businessman, but it was far removed from the reality of his life. When Baden-Clay was charged with Allison’s murder, most Australians were stunned. But they shouldn’t have been.
Privately, Baden-Clay had spent years deliberately chipping away at Allison’s confidence, cheating with multiple women, big-noting himself in business and borrowing big money from friends when his franchise began to fail and incur massive debts.
His narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) meant he felt justified in fabricating a false image and doing or taking what he wanted, even if it hurt others.
An NPD is a pervasive pattern of behaviour characterised by an excessive need for admiration, inflated views of oneself not backed up by reality, exploitation of others, a strong sense of entitlement and marked arrogance.
Baden-Clay displayed these characteristics and was not as clever as he thought. His story that Allison had wandered off overnight, ending up in a creek 13 kilometres away, was unconvincing and he was convicted of her murder in 2014.
Yesterday lawyers for Baden-Clay argued that his conviction for the murder of his wife should be quashed on the grounds it was ‘unreasonable’. The three judges will give a written judgment, expected within three months.
Simon Gittany also had a false exterior masking something much more sinister — in his case an anti-social personality disorder (ASPD). An ASPD is a pervasive pattern of behaviour characterised by a disregard for and violation of the rights of other people coupled with a lack of remorse.
In public Gittany played the loving partner of his Canadian fiancee, Lisa Harnum. But he had a long criminal record for assault, theft and drug-dealing. He secretly spied on Lisa, controlled her every move and alienated her from her friends and her family in Canada.
When Lisa tried to leave in July, 2011, Gittany threw her from the balcony of their fifteenth floor Sydney CBD apartment and claimed she had suddenly climbed over. Judge Lucy McCallum disagreed and found him guilty of murder.
These perpetrators all had a personality disorder and their dysfunctional pattern of behaviour towards their partners was rigid, lacking in empathy and focused only on their own needs. In each case the results were deadly.
Family Court in crisis: Children need more say in custody disputes (Australia)
This and similar articles have been published for decades now. Yet very little changes.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/family-court-in-crisis-child-protection-advocates-call-for-children-to-have-more-say-in-custody-disputes/story-fni0cx12-1227475426755
Family Court in crisis: Child protection advocates call for children to have more say in custody disputes
August 8, 2015 10:00am
LIA HARRIS The Sunday Telegraph
IT IS the claims by a teenage girl that highlights the dilemma faced by the Family Court when deciding who should get custody of the children: “Why am I not allowed to help decide what happens to me?”
The heartbreaking allegations contained in a letter from the 14-year-old who has been on the run with her brother and mother for the past nine months after her parents were awarded joint custody, tells how she is terrified of her allegedly abusive father and fears she might be “the next Luke Batty”.
After alleging how her father assaulted her brother and held a knife to her mother’s throat, she begs: “At what point do I become old enough to have a voice? At what point will those with the power choose to let me be heard? The courts won’t hear me. How is this fair? I want to be heard, to be understood and acknowledged.”
Just hours after the letter was written last week, police finally caught up with the trio and the mother was arrested only days before they planned to flee the country.
The letter comes as leading child protection and domestic violence advocates call for Family Court procedures to be overhauled to allow children caught up in family disputes to have more of a say in what happens to them.
They claim that in most cases the wishes of the children are not being taken into account by judges.
Instead, children are only appointed an independent children’s lawyer by Legal Aid when the case is considered to involve a high amount of conflict, or are interviewed by a court reporter who presents a family report to the court.
Victims of Crime Assistance League chief executive Robyn Cotterell-Jones said the children were often misrepresented or not heard at all during custody battles.
Robyn Cotterell-Jones, of Victims of Crime Assistance League of NSW, said children don’t get a big say when it comes to custody issues.
Although many children were appointed an independent children’s lawyer, she said they often spent very little time with the child and did not reflect their views in court.
“They don’t get much of a say at all and when they do say something, they don’t get heard,” Ms Cotterell-Jones said.
“There are all these kids out there being put at risk because the courts believe the mother is just being vindictive. The independent children’s lawyers often don’t even speak to the children or don’t represent their views accurately.
“They’re prioritising access to the father over the safety of the children and the system needs to change.”
Bravehearts founder and CEO Hetty Johnston said her not-for-profit child protection organisation was “aware of many instances where deficiencies in the Family Court practices, policies and procedures have resulted in children being assaulted and placed at serious risk of sexual harm”.
As a result, Bravehearts recently funded an inquiry called Abbey’s Project to uncover and reflect the experiences, testimony and outcomes for families and other stakeholders in their dealings with the Family Court.
“Every week in Australia, the Family Court orders children into contact with, and even into the custody of, parents who are dangerous, toxic and abusive because the Family Court does not have the powers, expertise and resources to competently investigate allegations of child abuse,” Ms Johnston said.
“Whether it’s child sexual assault, domestic violence, or both, the fact is there is no public accountability or transparency around matters dealt with by the Family Court. That is a combination that is always dangerous in any situation and in any organisation, including our judicial system.
“We are seeing far too many poor outcomes due to a combination of failures that culminate at the exit door of the Family Court.
“Too often children are not being heard and their testimonies disregarded or disbelieved.”
Domestic Violence NSW CEO Moo Baulch agreed children were not being heard in the Family Court.
“Children’s voices are not being heard and mothers are being portrayed as coercing children into making statements or victim blaming,” Ms Baulch said.
“It puts children at risk and it puts women at risk.
“If children are saying ‘I don’t want to spend time with him’, surely we should be listening to that.” Sydney University Law School professor Judith Cashmore, who in 2009 researched and wrote a paper about children’s involvement in the Family Court, said most children wanted more of a say in custody matters.
Of the 47 children involved in Family Court matters interviewed for the study, 90 per cent stated they “should be involved” in the case and “most of the children who expressed strong and unqualified views were involved in contested matters”.
Prof Cashmore said the Family Court often took the view that children could be coerced by one parent and therefore their opinions could not be taken seriously.
“That’s a strong perception of the process ... But being able to see through that and understand if children are making those strong statements, then I think they should be taken very seriously,” Prof Cashmore said.
“We do need to listen more carefully and provide better mechanisms for kids who’ve been through it all and are not being heard (by the court).”
A Family Court spokeswoman said children were appointed independent lawyers in disputes involving a high level of conflict, including allegations of abuse, but were rarely allowed to address the court directly.
“(The lawyer) represents a child’s best interests and ensures that that is the focus of any decisions about parenting arrangements,” she said.
THE LETTER
The teenage girl wrote a letter to The Sunday Telegraph detailing the horrific abuse the family allegedly suffered at the hands of her father and her fear of being forced to live with him.
My name is X,
And I am scared of my dad. I have seen him in a rage throw my brother across the room. He has held a knife to my mother’s throat telling her how easy it would be to cut it … and the court has given me to him.
I explained to the court ordered evaluation all the things he has done that scare me and how he told us he killed the family animals after we asked for them back. He has done some things that are like Luke Batty’s dad which have been reported to DoCs… And still the court has given me to him.
I have tried to tell all the legal people involved how scared he makes me but I am too young for anyone to listen yet I am 14. Why am I not allowed to help decide what happens to me? I feel like I am screaming in a sound proof room because my voice has been stolen from me.
I feel like a refugee in my own country because the courts and the government have given me to him. Am I a slave? The court say my dad now owns me and the Police can drag me wherever they want.
At what point do I become old enough to have a voice? At what point will those with the power choose to let me be heard? The courts won’t hear me. How is this fair? I want to be heard, to be understood and acknowledged.
I hope that somewhere in the cosmos is a place where I am valued and safe. I don’t want to be the next Luke Batty.
I want to be protected from my dad. I need someone to hear my voice and understand that all I want is a life without fear. The only person to listen to me is my mum. She believes me when I tell her I am scared and keeps me safe but they will jail her for listening to me.
The only people who can hear me are you as you read this appeal. The only way you can help me is to share this with your friends and sign the petition for action — so please share this, print the poster and stick it up everywhere to create awareness.
Post it on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. It’s time for awareness and change. Attach it to emails and send it to anyone you think of who can help … to help me and my brother find a voice, the voice that has been stolen from us.
We were not asked to be part of any hearing or give our opinions and concerns to any lawyer. Help me have a voice to have my views and issues recognised by the courts, the Police and my dad.
Encourage all those with big voices to look at what the court have stopped being entered as evidence by my dad and his team of barristers as he tries to take possession of me. Please help me to get as many signatures as possible.
I am scared and I need your help.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/family-court-in-crisis-child-protection-advocates-call-for-children-to-have-more-say-in-custody-disputes/story-fni0cx12-1227475426755
Family Court in crisis: Child protection advocates call for children to have more say in custody disputes
August 8, 2015 10:00am
LIA HARRIS The Sunday Telegraph
IT IS the claims by a teenage girl that highlights the dilemma faced by the Family Court when deciding who should get custody of the children: “Why am I not allowed to help decide what happens to me?”
The heartbreaking allegations contained in a letter from the 14-year-old who has been on the run with her brother and mother for the past nine months after her parents were awarded joint custody, tells how she is terrified of her allegedly abusive father and fears she might be “the next Luke Batty”.
After alleging how her father assaulted her brother and held a knife to her mother’s throat, she begs: “At what point do I become old enough to have a voice? At what point will those with the power choose to let me be heard? The courts won’t hear me. How is this fair? I want to be heard, to be understood and acknowledged.”
Just hours after the letter was written last week, police finally caught up with the trio and the mother was arrested only days before they planned to flee the country.
The letter comes as leading child protection and domestic violence advocates call for Family Court procedures to be overhauled to allow children caught up in family disputes to have more of a say in what happens to them.
They claim that in most cases the wishes of the children are not being taken into account by judges.
Instead, children are only appointed an independent children’s lawyer by Legal Aid when the case is considered to involve a high amount of conflict, or are interviewed by a court reporter who presents a family report to the court.
Victims of Crime Assistance League chief executive Robyn Cotterell-Jones said the children were often misrepresented or not heard at all during custody battles.
Robyn Cotterell-Jones, of Victims of Crime Assistance League of NSW, said children don’t get a big say when it comes to custody issues.
Although many children were appointed an independent children’s lawyer, she said they often spent very little time with the child and did not reflect their views in court.
“They don’t get much of a say at all and when they do say something, they don’t get heard,” Ms Cotterell-Jones said.
“There are all these kids out there being put at risk because the courts believe the mother is just being vindictive. The independent children’s lawyers often don’t even speak to the children or don’t represent their views accurately.
“They’re prioritising access to the father over the safety of the children and the system needs to change.”
Bravehearts founder and CEO Hetty Johnston said her not-for-profit child protection organisation was “aware of many instances where deficiencies in the Family Court practices, policies and procedures have resulted in children being assaulted and placed at serious risk of sexual harm”.
As a result, Bravehearts recently funded an inquiry called Abbey’s Project to uncover and reflect the experiences, testimony and outcomes for families and other stakeholders in their dealings with the Family Court.
“Every week in Australia, the Family Court orders children into contact with, and even into the custody of, parents who are dangerous, toxic and abusive because the Family Court does not have the powers, expertise and resources to competently investigate allegations of child abuse,” Ms Johnston said.
“Whether it’s child sexual assault, domestic violence, or both, the fact is there is no public accountability or transparency around matters dealt with by the Family Court. That is a combination that is always dangerous in any situation and in any organisation, including our judicial system.
“We are seeing far too many poor outcomes due to a combination of failures that culminate at the exit door of the Family Court.
“Too often children are not being heard and their testimonies disregarded or disbelieved.”
Domestic Violence NSW CEO Moo Baulch agreed children were not being heard in the Family Court.
“Children’s voices are not being heard and mothers are being portrayed as coercing children into making statements or victim blaming,” Ms Baulch said.
“It puts children at risk and it puts women at risk.
“If children are saying ‘I don’t want to spend time with him’, surely we should be listening to that.” Sydney University Law School professor Judith Cashmore, who in 2009 researched and wrote a paper about children’s involvement in the Family Court, said most children wanted more of a say in custody matters.
Of the 47 children involved in Family Court matters interviewed for the study, 90 per cent stated they “should be involved” in the case and “most of the children who expressed strong and unqualified views were involved in contested matters”.
Prof Cashmore said the Family Court often took the view that children could be coerced by one parent and therefore their opinions could not be taken seriously.
“That’s a strong perception of the process ... But being able to see through that and understand if children are making those strong statements, then I think they should be taken very seriously,” Prof Cashmore said.
“We do need to listen more carefully and provide better mechanisms for kids who’ve been through it all and are not being heard (by the court).”
A Family Court spokeswoman said children were appointed independent lawyers in disputes involving a high level of conflict, including allegations of abuse, but were rarely allowed to address the court directly.
“(The lawyer) represents a child’s best interests and ensures that that is the focus of any decisions about parenting arrangements,” she said.
THE LETTER
The teenage girl wrote a letter to The Sunday Telegraph detailing the horrific abuse the family allegedly suffered at the hands of her father and her fear of being forced to live with him.
My name is X,
And I am scared of my dad. I have seen him in a rage throw my brother across the room. He has held a knife to my mother’s throat telling her how easy it would be to cut it … and the court has given me to him.
I explained to the court ordered evaluation all the things he has done that scare me and how he told us he killed the family animals after we asked for them back. He has done some things that are like Luke Batty’s dad which have been reported to DoCs… And still the court has given me to him.
I have tried to tell all the legal people involved how scared he makes me but I am too young for anyone to listen yet I am 14. Why am I not allowed to help decide what happens to me? I feel like I am screaming in a sound proof room because my voice has been stolen from me.
I feel like a refugee in my own country because the courts and the government have given me to him. Am I a slave? The court say my dad now owns me and the Police can drag me wherever they want.
At what point do I become old enough to have a voice? At what point will those with the power choose to let me be heard? The courts won’t hear me. How is this fair? I want to be heard, to be understood and acknowledged.
I hope that somewhere in the cosmos is a place where I am valued and safe. I don’t want to be the next Luke Batty.
I want to be protected from my dad. I need someone to hear my voice and understand that all I want is a life without fear. The only person to listen to me is my mum. She believes me when I tell her I am scared and keeps me safe but they will jail her for listening to me.
The only people who can hear me are you as you read this appeal. The only way you can help me is to share this with your friends and sign the petition for action — so please share this, print the poster and stick it up everywhere to create awareness.
Post it on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. It’s time for awareness and change. Attach it to emails and send it to anyone you think of who can help … to help me and my brother find a voice, the voice that has been stolen from us.
We were not asked to be part of any hearing or give our opinions and concerns to any lawyer. Help me have a voice to have my views and issues recognised by the courts, the Police and my dad.
Encourage all those with big voices to look at what the court have stopped being entered as evidence by my dad and his team of barristers as he tries to take possession of me. Please help me to get as many signatures as possible.
I am scared and I need your help.
Sunday, August 16, 2015
Government appeals lawsuit won by protective mother after social workers allowed dad to molest child (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada)
Patriarchal systems defend fathers. That's what they do. Sickening, but true.
http://www.brandonsun.com/national/breaking-news/bc-appeals-decision-in-case-of-father-who-sexually-abused-kids-in-care-321060591.html?thx=y
The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION
Mom says B.C. government 'inhumane' to appeal scathing child sex abuse decision
By: Laura Kane, The Canadian Press Friday, Aug. 7, 2015 at 6:03 PM
VANCOUVER - A mother who won a lawsuit against the British Columbia government after social workers enabled her estranged husband to molest their toddler in foster care says the province's decision to appeal the ruling is cruel and sadistic.
The Justice Ministry said it filed documents Friday seeking clarity from the Court of Appeal of B.C. A judge found last month that social workers knowingly violated a court order and allowed unsupervised access to a father who had sexually abused his other kids.
"I think it's completely rude, and inhumane for them to go on against little children who have been hurt so terribly," the mother, known in court documents as J.P., said in a statement.
She said the Ministry of Children and Family Development has been hurting her family since 2009, when it falsely accused her of being mentally ill and seized her children.
"What they have done for six years and now are continuing to do is cruel and sadistic. Like the people running the MCFD. We are suffering because of them."
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Paul Walker ruled last month the ministry showed "reckless disregard" when it failed to investigate the kids' claims that their father had sexually abused them.
J.P. and her former husband, identified as B.G., have four children, born between 2002 and 2008.
Walker ruled in a custody trial in 2012 that B.G. had sexually abused his three eldest children. In his recent ruling, he found the man had also molested his youngest child while the girl was in foster care.
Children's Minister Stephanie Cadieux said government lawyers advised her the trial judge erred in a number of areas and that an appeal was warranted.
"I want to make clear that today's decision is not about the family involved, but about every family that the ministry may interact with in the future," she said in a statement.
Cadieux, who declined interviews, said the appeal will not impact former senior civil servant Bob Plecas's review of the case. She said any staff concerns that arise will be examined by a separate human resources investigation.
But Doug Donaldson, the Opposition NDP's critic for the Children's Ministry, said the appeal "completely guts" the review. Plecas already lacked the ability to compel testimony, and his powers will be further hindered by an ongoing court case, he said.
"What it seems to be is that the internal review was a sideshow and an attempt to deflect attention," Donaldson said.
Children and youth representative Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond said the ministry didn't consult the mother before announcing the review and J.P. has filed a complaint with the privacy commissioner.
The mom learned of the appeal through media on Friday, Turpel-Lafond said.
"There could have been a more respectful way to do this," Turpel-Lafond said. "She feels quite harmed."
The notice of appeal filed Friday is sealed because it includes family members' full names. The province said its comprehensive arguments will be publicly available and filed within 90 days.
J.P.'s lawyer, Jack Hittrich, said it's disturbing that the ministry's role is to protect children but it refuses to take responsibility for repeatedly failing a mother and her four kids.
"This ministry has done everything to vilify J.P., place her children in danger, allow the youngest to be sexually abused in breach of a court order," he said in a statement.
"The one thing that can be said is that this ministry has been very consistent in its refusal to abide by the law or court rulings."
http://www.brandonsun.com/national/breaking-news/bc-appeals-decision-in-case-of-father-who-sexually-abused-kids-in-care-321060591.html?thx=y
The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION
Mom says B.C. government 'inhumane' to appeal scathing child sex abuse decision
By: Laura Kane, The Canadian Press Friday, Aug. 7, 2015 at 6:03 PM
VANCOUVER - A mother who won a lawsuit against the British Columbia government after social workers enabled her estranged husband to molest their toddler in foster care says the province's decision to appeal the ruling is cruel and sadistic.
The Justice Ministry said it filed documents Friday seeking clarity from the Court of Appeal of B.C. A judge found last month that social workers knowingly violated a court order and allowed unsupervised access to a father who had sexually abused his other kids.
"I think it's completely rude, and inhumane for them to go on against little children who have been hurt so terribly," the mother, known in court documents as J.P., said in a statement.
She said the Ministry of Children and Family Development has been hurting her family since 2009, when it falsely accused her of being mentally ill and seized her children.
"What they have done for six years and now are continuing to do is cruel and sadistic. Like the people running the MCFD. We are suffering because of them."
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Paul Walker ruled last month the ministry showed "reckless disregard" when it failed to investigate the kids' claims that their father had sexually abused them.
J.P. and her former husband, identified as B.G., have four children, born between 2002 and 2008.
Walker ruled in a custody trial in 2012 that B.G. had sexually abused his three eldest children. In his recent ruling, he found the man had also molested his youngest child while the girl was in foster care.
Children's Minister Stephanie Cadieux said government lawyers advised her the trial judge erred in a number of areas and that an appeal was warranted.
"I want to make clear that today's decision is not about the family involved, but about every family that the ministry may interact with in the future," she said in a statement.
Cadieux, who declined interviews, said the appeal will not impact former senior civil servant Bob Plecas's review of the case. She said any staff concerns that arise will be examined by a separate human resources investigation.
But Doug Donaldson, the Opposition NDP's critic for the Children's Ministry, said the appeal "completely guts" the review. Plecas already lacked the ability to compel testimony, and his powers will be further hindered by an ongoing court case, he said.
"What it seems to be is that the internal review was a sideshow and an attempt to deflect attention," Donaldson said.
Children and youth representative Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond said the ministry didn't consult the mother before announcing the review and J.P. has filed a complaint with the privacy commissioner.
The mom learned of the appeal through media on Friday, Turpel-Lafond said.
"There could have been a more respectful way to do this," Turpel-Lafond said. "She feels quite harmed."
The notice of appeal filed Friday is sealed because it includes family members' full names. The province said its comprehensive arguments will be publicly available and filed within 90 days.
J.P.'s lawyer, Jack Hittrich, said it's disturbing that the ministry's role is to protect children but it refuses to take responsibility for repeatedly failing a mother and her four kids.
"This ministry has done everything to vilify J.P., place her children in danger, allow the youngest to be sexually abused in breach of a court order," he said in a statement.
"The one thing that can be said is that this ministry has been very consistent in its refusal to abide by the law or court rulings."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)