I just finished a 2 week jury trial and finished on such a high note, I could literally hear angels cheer from Heaven. It was my client’s birthday. Mom had been banned from seeing her children other than supervised visits virtually dictated by Dr. Joanna Anderson, whom I later discovered is the only psychologist to have given the judge a stream of campaign contribution to get through the door and stay there, however unqualified she might be
|THE “EXPERT” IN SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN APPOINTED TO A HIGH CONFLICT CASE INVOLVING CHILD ABUSE AND GASLIGHTING… ???|
The campaign contribution would not have bothered me so much had I not already known this so called unqualified “expert” (who is an expert with regard to severely disabled children and young adults with autism, cerebral palsy and other developmental disorders, rather than psychopathology, personality disordered abusers, and pedophiles who can deceive just about anyone paying attention–who understands a psychopath’s mind) relied upon parental alienation syndrome, deemed junk science by the American Psychological Association and the American Medical Association–making it inadmissible in a court of law nationwide.
There’s good reason why not one peer review journal ever published the ludicrous pro-pedophile proganda of the late Richard Gardner, who ultimately killed the “pedophile within himself” as he drove a steak knife through his heart to end his misery, unable to reconcile truth with the bullshit he had been pedaling for 30 years.
Gardner’s Parental alienation syndrome has poisoned and defiled our courtrooms, robbing everyone present of common sense. Gardner falsely stated (without any statistics to back it up) that 95% of sexual abuse allegations were fabricated by crazed mothers who were out to get their ex husbands by coaching the children to make the allegations against the father.
The hostility the child showed the father was simply more evidence of the coaching never proven because God forbid, the child might actually have some legitimate hatred towards the father for raping them through vicious acts of sexual abuse beginning as early as 7 and continuing today–almost certainly. It’s insane that another attorney is unethical enough to argue that my client coached her children without a shred of proof that her character was consistent (dishonest or manipulative) with a sick twisted person who would do such a thing. The statistics actually show that 1-5% maximum of sexual abuse allegations are false, with the whopping 95-99% true.
Dr. Joanna Anderson called in her legal team to protect herself after I began asking questions and demanding that she return and testify. Whereas she was happy to accept a subpoena from my opposing counsel to attend the trial, she ignored mine and disappeared from her office to be served with my subpoena to return and defend her ludicrous slander based on advice of counsel and the crooked Amicus attorney, who had her personal cell phone number and was texting her to notify her that my server was en route.
Anderson knew she was needed back in a trial of custody involving serious allegations of sexual abuse, physical abuse, death threats, and emotional torture of two children since they were ages 3 and 7. The children are now 11 and 15. Mom was the hero in the mix and the only one. Everyone else was a coward, Like Anderson. She knew she was needed back in trial and that those two boys future was hanging in the balance.
But she hid from my process server and I did not get to cross examine her for the boys’ protection. She was too busy calling her legal team to protect against my demands she answer to the jury–and I was protecting the boys. So, Anderson was protecting the father or herself, but not the children. And she was like every other political hack in that regard, paying her way into the family court system of appointment despite her incompetence, lies and lack of a spine–unwilling to withstand my cross examination on a paper she threw in my lap moments before taking the stand. It was a garbage laden “update” on the parties through last year, but not this one. Aha, she joined the club in 2005 and is a dues paying member!anderson contribut
I thought that was the Amicus Jose’s job, but he didn’t feel obligated to call even one witness or present one exhibit. He was covering up for his neglect three years ago. His decision was made the moment Myrna Gregory secured his appointment–against my client. He said as much. I noted Jose showed us his private text messages with Dr. Anderson (also recommended by Gregory) about my subpoena. As soon as my server arrived, she was MIA. Much like Suzanne Howard, the other therapist Anderson selected the was supposed to do therapy with mom and boys, which Dad remained in contempt of court for 4 years and skated by.
If I closed my eyes, I would see another sex offender / domestic abuser who deemed himself slick in a tragic case involving an autistic boy whose life was derailed 15 years due to the money his father had to pay everyone off. Bribes and threats are the general M.O. of these guys.
They know they can get everyone to back down to their scare tactics and I have do no doubt he used them because he threatened the only therapist who actually saw the boys a few years back into not being willing to testify for all of the legal fees she spent defending herself against his bad faith allegations of seeing his sons “without his consent.” If someone had to wait on this man’s consent, it would NEVER HAPPEN. We jumped through every imaginable hurdle for 4 years to try to make something work and finally even agreed he could pick the therapist. We got only 4 visits then. No competent therapist would ever give na opinion after seeing someone 4 hours.
I don’t believe Anderson is or was competent to perform domestic violence, sexual abuse examinations and I don’t know why she did not contact the therapists, forensic medical professionals, psychiatrists, nurses and 14 professionals who originally found they had a mandatory duty to report sexual/physical abuse to CPS.
If she wanted to know the truth and have a methodology that was solid under TRE 702 Daubert and Frye tests, she would have turned over every stone. Now, I know she didn’t want to know the truth. Why? Three years ago, 2015, my client was ambushed in every dirty imaginable way by the system: her lawyer was paid off to testify against her and keep out the records of sexual abuse, Dad chose every expert and paid them in advance of her meeting any of them (that he didn’t threaten away) to control what came out.
I sit and wonder whether my opposing counsel and Jose the couch potato (who appeared and didn’t know if he was appointed amicus or attorney ad litem 4 years down the road on the day of trial) were actually that stupid. I educated them so I choose to believe they know better. I believe they were part of the effort to “cover everyone’s backsides” (except the children’s) for the mistakes made in 2015.
Money bought the result in 2015 and Gardner’s pedophile propaganda that makes it easier to believe mom is crazy than to believe a father would do the things this man DID.
Given the political environment, how much do you think Nov. 6 has to do with this? The Election is coming November 6, 2018, which has to play some part.
Everyone scratches everyone’s backs? The professionals rationalized to get paid and to keep these children hostages because there was enough ambiguity in the 6 1/2 year history of abuse to throw shocking slander our way (without prior notice) via Anderson’s report which she dumped on me right before taking the stand. It was so much easier to ambush me and call mom crazy, despite dad being in a mental hospital with suicide threats 3x, all but raping mom at gunpoint.
The lawyers and judge became arm-chair psychiatrists practicing without a license and pulled a rabbit out of a hat (that my client needed a psych eval rather than Dad).
It’s one thing to get duped by a psychopath and the law provides immunity for that because the best of us can fall prey to their deception. But, it’s quite another to knowingly choose to cover your backside and play politics because you think someone else’s child is expendable.
It’s a mixed bag in family court. There are so many amazing judges and I’ve worked for men and women of impeccable integrity my entire career (save probate and family court), so I am confident all is not lost. In the sewer that is probate court, ALL IS LOST! I have no confidence in anyone practicing there and have seen enough people die and have their inheritance stolen from them by lawyers to know. Family Court is on that downward slide if we don’t put the brakes on and do the right thing. INTEGRITY IS BECOMING EXTINCT.
I AM PROUD TO BRAG–I have never compromised a client’s case to win. If my client’s interests are not aligned with the child’s, I don’t take them. It makes it easier to advocate with my heart. But that’s not how the opposition plays the game. Apparently, her website brags “will do anything to win at all costs.” I think she meant that “ALL COSTS” part.
Our profession is flooded with psychopaths who care only about winning and have no regard for fairness or ethics. They’d rather file GAG ORDERS against me to conceal the truth. They view other people’s children as “serfs” entitled to less than they’d give their own children, if they have children at all. They are accustomed to getting paid and moving on.
When I sought accountability, Anderson and Howard disappeared from the face of the earth, nowhere to be found, despite having adequate notice they needed to be there. Anderson’s legal team must have advised her to stay away, my guess. Bad move. Mistakes are forgivable. Sabotage of children’s lives ….. not!!!
My intentions have been forgiving and gracious to a fault, believing that if I threw a dog a bone, he’d make things right. Ultimately, reprobate minds again! They live as if there is no God, no Justice in this World. Call me naive, but I believe in a God of Justice and nowhere is His Wrath more apparent than in matters of children, widows, the vulnerable–notably, those whom these tricksters have abandoned, in favor of covering their own backsides.
I found this wonderful piece by Author Diane Dimond (Author of Expose regarding sexual abuse of Michael Jackson’s victims). I found it profound because it matches this case in every way. The courage of these boys to come forward 14 times knowing their lives were at stake, taking risks to their very lives to talk–and the slow process by which the allegations trickled out–can be seen in both.
But face it, you’d have to be a masochist with a death wish to tell anyone else after suffering horrendous abuse, broken bones, sexual abuse, and death threats from the first time you told 14 forensic medical and psychiatric professionals and no one helped you. These children have learned that our system is broken, something which Governor Abbott finally agrees after a federal judge took over the foster care system because children were coming out of the system more abused than when they went in.
Judge John Schmude recently chastised CPS for outright deception and ordered CPS to read Art. I of the Texas Constitution and Entire Family Code, sanctioning them in outrage at their fraud on the court. If the Tutt case is any indication of CPS’ incompetent, corrupt, power hungry abuses of power, that homeschool family could write a book. Everyone knows CPS is incompetent, at the least. The attorneys in my case did as well. Yet, these professionals and the Judge let the clock TICK TOCK…. TICK TOCK… all singing in the dark, hoping nothing bad happens–with this man, good luck.
Like Diane DiMond, I do not blame the jury at all. Get in the ring with a psychopath unarmed and see how you fare! I blame the professionals for sloppy, biased half baked efforts that do not satisfy their fiduciary obligations and the ethical standards to which they are held. The Judge being the ultimate fiduciary.
How can they sleep at night? Chapter 153 prohibits a parent who’s even neglected a child from having joint / sole managing conservatorship, yet this Court nonchalantly enters the order sealing their fate–despite clear evidence of neglect.
Suddenly, the lawyers and judge turned doctors are prescribing the treatment my Client is going to have to endure ALONG WITH SIX MONTHS BAN FROM HER KIDS not medically prescribed, rather than simply enforcing the law.
Yet, out of that outrage, came CHILDREN’S RIGHTS TEXAS! The quintessential lemonade maker, I am determined with a few good moms and dads to use their evil for good. Our goal is to expose the wrongdoing in the family courts so that we can stop the profiting from your misery and miscarriages of justice–destroying children’s lives. I cannot sit back and say nothing.
Be the change you want to see in the World! CHILDREN’S RIGHTS TEXAS will be the third nonprofit organization I have founded, but I need your help to be the force we must be take down the corruption. Father’s rights had legitimate concerns in forming, but somehow adopted PAS to the very detriment of the children father’s claim to love. Perhaps awareness is the key to all factions banning this trash from our courts. We Welcome men, women and children who are for families and peace.
Family Court is a firing range to kill the enemy. Contact me Candice@childrensrightstexas.org or 832-315-8489. We need public speakers, fundraisers, mothers and fathers interested in their children’s futures. We welcome any time, donation or help you can give. Thank you for saving the lives of countless children through your giving. Enjoy Ms. Dimond’s feature:
Wanted: Common Sense in the Jury Box
May 15, 2017 by Diane Dimond Leave a Comment
Diana Dimond is best known for breaking the story of child molestation allegations against singer Michael Jackson in late 1993 and following the story through the entertainer’s criminal trial in 2005. Dimond has also worked for CNBC as co-anchor of UpFront Tonight a nightly news program with Geraldo Rivera, at MSNBC as a political correspondent and anchor and at Fox News as a week-end anchor. At Court TV Dimond was an anchor of daytime court coverage and Chief Correspondent of the CTV investigative Unit. In 2008, Dimond began writing a weekly syndicated crime and justice column.
Diane says “We should all have a profound respect for our jury system. In a justice system that is obviously not perfect, average citizens put their lives on hold to serve as jurors so defendants get a fair shot at impartiality. Jurors act as a counter balance to attorney’s legal maneuverings as they apply their common sense to the proceedings.
But in a world where defense attorneys use every trick in the book and bend the meaning of “reasonable doubt” beyond all comprehension jurors can sometimes be led off the path to justice. I have sat in many courtrooms and watched this process first hand.”
Gonzales-Mugaburu Speaks to Police Officers Before His Arrest on Child Sex Abuse Charges
Take the case against Cesar Gonzales-Mugaburu. The complaints about his behavior began as early as 1998. Authorities got disturbing reports that the single foster father may have been sexually abusing young boys placed in his care. But over and over again – during at least 18 separate child abuse investigations – no action was taken against this foster parent. Officials continued to send Gonzales-Mugaburu even more children. Later, it would be said, there had been a breakdown in communication between the various agencies tasked with keeping the children safe.
Over the years, Gonzales-Mugaburu took in a total of 106 young boys, by describing himself as especially suited to handle the needs of the mentally challenged and physically handicapped. He received up to $18,000 each month to care for them.
Chris Couret Says He Was Also One of the Defendants Sex Abuse Victims
In Marc 2016, Gonzales-Mugaburu, 60, was arrested on charges that he physically and sexually abused eight of his wards, children as young as 8. The District Attorney of Suffolk County, New York made it clear he would like to have filed even more charges but the statute of limitations made that impossible.
At trial all eight accusers – ages 16 to 29 – tearfully testified. They told the jury heartbreaking stories of trying to get help from school guidance counselors, visiting social workers and neighbors. They testified to repeated acts of emotional and sexual abuse against themselves, the other boys and even the family dog. One testified he was locked in his room for a month at a time, stripped of his hearing aids. Their jarring testimony deserves more space than is allowed here but according to almost everyone in the courtroom their stories were intense, detailed and so similar as to prove the defendant’s modus operandi.
Gonzales-Mugaburu always maintained his innocence. His attorney Donald A. Mates Jr. told the jury, “This crazy story that you heard is just that.”
As Mates pointed out to the jury, the state continued to assign more boys to the Gonzales-Mugaburu home, didn’t they? And since the accusers were “troubled boys,” they were likely to make up stories. Mates also told the jury the accusers were likely motivated by money and mentioned that they would probably sue the agencies responsible for placing them in that home. Mates waved the “reasonable doubt” flag over and over.
The jury bought it. After a five-week trial Gonzales-Mugaburu was acquitted of all charges.
The jury foreman, Tim Carney, told reporters after the verdict that he tended to believe the boys testimony but, “I could not put a man away for the rest of his life on what they gave us, the evidence they produced. There was nothing ever to back them up.”
Many Jurors Later Say They Were Confused by What “Reasonable Doubt” Really Means
To this veteran court watcher this outcome underscores two flaws within the justice system. First, that judges do not adequately explain – in layman’s terms – what reasonable doubt is. As one of my former Court TV colleagues once explained it to me, “A lawyer might tell a jury that the sun will not come up tomorrow. But common sense tells them that is not so.” In other words, our system relies on the common sense of jurors.
The second flaw, to my mind, is that prosecutors don’t – or are not allowed by the judge – to explain to jurors the psychological mindset of child sex abuse victims. Their stories don’t spill out all at once in a coherent narrative. They gradually reveal their horrors, watching to see how adults react to each disclosure. And experts say that young boys who have been sexually assaulted are the most reticent to reveal, often never telling what happened lest their manhood be questioned.
Eight males the prosecution called “victims” told their stories to the Gonzales-Mugaburu jury. An ex-police officer neighbor testified that starving boys would come to him for food, locked outside for hours in the snow by their foster parent. Yet the jurors apparently wanted corroboration? Like an eyewitness to sexual activity? Physical scars proving the allegations? A school counselor who would admit to hearing a boy’s plea but ignoring it? None of that would ever happen outside a TV crime drama. There are few Perry Mason moments in a sex abuse trial. Common sense must prevail.
I don’t like to question a jury’s verdict, because they alone, heard all the evidence and carefully deliberated. But this time I fear this jury may have unplugged their common sense.
Commentary: I agree.