This is an truly incredible story that should never have happened in America.
Parts of the Kansas Judicial system should be disciplined for how it has victimized Ms. Dombrowski, who was an abused mom.
- KS Appellate -- KS Supreme Court Briefs in reference to the Documented Violence of Hal Richardson and the Kansas Courts.
======
Testimony by Claudine Dombrowski at the hearing of the Kansas Joint Committee on Children's Issues on Nov 30, 2009 in Topeka
Rest of article from the Kansas Watch Dog here:
http://kansas.watchdog.org/2010/compelling-stories-about-problems-with-placement-and-removal-of-children/
=====
Dombrowski v. United States, #66407 – Petitioner
INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Entire Petition here: http://www.stopfamilyviolence.org/pages/308
=====
Shawnee County Case Docket.
=======
10th Federal Court District
(This will be re filed and updated to 2011)
Dombrowski v. Richardson et al
Filed: May 11, 2009 as 2:2009cv02250
Plaintiff: Claudine Dombrowski
Defendants: Hal Richardson and Shawnee County District Court
Presiding Judge: District Judge John W. Lungstrum
Referring Judge: Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse
Cause Of Action: Diversity-Personal Injury
Court: Tenth Circuit > Kansas > District Court
Type: Civil Rights > Plaintiff
| Plaintiff: | Claudine Dombrowski |
| Defendants: | Hal Richardson and Shawnee County District Court |
| Case Number: | 2:2009cv02250 |
| Filed: | May 11, 2009 |
| Court: | Kansas District Court |
| Office: | Kansas City Office |
| County: | Shawnee |
| Presiding Judge: | District Judge John W. Lungstrum |
| Referring Judge: | Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse |
| Nature of Suit: | Civil Rights - Other Civil Rights |
| Cause: | 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| Jurisdiction: | Diversity |
| Jury Demanded By: | Plaintiff
|
=======
Claudine Dombrowski: An abused mom victimized again by the Kansas Courts
Posted in Children, Kansas Government by kansaswatchdog on December 4th, 2009
Claudine Dombrowski: An abused mom victimized again by the Kansas Courts
This is an truly incredible story that should never have happened in America.
Parts of the Kansas Judicial system should be disciplined for how it has victimized Ms. Dombrowski, who was an abused mom.
Instead of quotes from the audio, please consult these pages that document Dombrowski’s long and difficult battle to protect her daughter:
As you view these photos keep in mind that the court awarded FULL CUSTODY of their daughter to the “man” who did this to Claudine.
-
Courts Have Continued Abuse of Manhattan Women, Manhattan Free Press, July 12, 2001.
-
Manhattan resident fights custody battle for daughter, Kansas State Collegian, July 26, 2001.
State Rep Bill Otto: “No crime? You haven’t been guilty of anything? This is a court order that says you can’t go to any school functions?”
“I was under court order till 2004 to not even call the police after I was being beaten because … I was not ‘co-parenting’”
Dombrowski: “These friends of the court make recommendations to the judge. The parents … don’t have a right to see these documents. They do this behind closed doors.”
Otto: (To Secretary Jordan): “You have no rights as a parent …?”
Secretary Don Jordan: “This would be something extreme … I’m not familiar with the situation.”
Otto: “Can a judge do that? … Is that legal… ?”
Jordan: “Under the right circumstances … I hesitate to speculate.”
Sen. Roger Reitz: “This is something that only … the judicial system can really answer … It would be helpful … to have someone … representing the judicial system … to give us some ideas how this could happen.”
Dombrowski: “When you are a victim of domestic violence, and suddenly there’s a child involved, the typical …. power of control is that ‘I’ll take your children from you’. They will and they can the way the laws are setup.” …
“I was told that I’m not to talk to my daughter about the violence. That’s why I don’t see her. That’s why I see her supervised. He was criminally convicted. “
“When women try to get away from people who hurt them … I heard somebody say it’s really hard to believe you won’t call the police … I tell people not to contact the police, because as soon as you walk into court with a DV (domestic violence) and children, you’re already cutting your throat. You will lose your children. That’s the way it is right now.”
“… on the 16th of this month I’ll probably go to jail for breaking the gag order and talking about [being the victim of] violence as it relates to my case.”
Reitz: “… someone ought to be able to deal with this in a way that would address her problem. It doesn’t seem like we’ve done the right thing with regards to this little niche of the law.”
Dombrowski: “The criminal convictions are completely tossed aside and they don’t have any bearing on the family court … The eight criminal convictions that my ex had before getting custody of my daughter were completely dropped [in family court]“
Chair Kiegerl: “I cannot believe that abuse is totally ignored. I cannot believe you can prohibit a person from speaking about their own case.”
“The one thing [where] … I disagree with you is abuse should always be reported.”
State Rep Peggy Mast (R-Emporia): “Domestic violence is a control issue. Sexual abuse is a control issue. Is there any correlation between domestic violence and sexual abuse? Why is that not something that is considered when we take someone to [family] court that has a history of domestic violence?”
Dombrowski: “Yes. That is something I’ve asked myself for 16 years. … It comes back to the family court that has a veil of immunity. … They don’t fully understand the impact of the violence. What battered women have … if they report the abuse, then they’re failing to protect their child … if they don’t report the abuse, they’re still failing to protect their child. So, both ways, they’re going to lose their children …”
For anybody who abuses their wife … [from] a 1996 presidential task force … there is a 70% increase that those children will be abused and/or sexually abused after there’s been battery with the mother.
Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudea: “In 2004 …. I talked with the homicide department in Sedgwick County…. During that time there had been 21 homicides in Sedgwick County and 18 were due to domestic violence …”
“A lot of women do make those phone calls and unfortunately, sometimes it ends in their death.” …
“I want to apologize to you for being treated like a pedophile … not being able to go to a music concert.”
“I commend you for what you’re doing.”
Dombrowski: “I have not talked to my daughter in 10 years [except] for the confines of supervised visits. I’m not allowed to talk to her about anything. All she knows is what her dad has told her.”
-
See this video: Abused Mom Wants Unsupervised Visits with Daughter
Listen to Claudine Dombrowski:
COURTS CONTINUE ABUSE OF BATTERED MOTHER
http://www.kansas.net/~freepress/7-12-01-8.html
By Jon A. Brake
Manhattan Free Press
MANHATTAN, KS - To some this could be considered beautiful. Solid mahogany is beautiful when given a high finish and it does have a high finish. It is about four to four and a half feet long, a foot and a half high; with shinny brass handles at the foot and head. A child's coffin, in this home has been turned into a coffee table.
To Claudine Dombrowski it is not beautiful, that is her daughter, six-year-old Rikki on the couch behind the threatening coffee table. If a coffin coffee table is not enough, a hunting rifle hangs on the wall above the couch.
Claudine, a Manhattan resident, was divorced from Hal Richardson in Shawnee County District Count in 1997. She had been a repeat victim of Domestic Violence and a repeat victim of the State Court System.
What does the Court System think of the coffin coffee table? In a letter to Shawnee County District Court Division Two Judge Richard D. Anderson, Harry Moore, with the Court Services stated: "When I was at the house, I did not recognize anything which in my experience resembled a child's coffin. After looking at the picture and speaking with Mr. Richardson, I have come to find out that it is indeed a coffin and that it was an antique which he purchased in Mexico several years ago and uses as a coffee or end table of sorts."
What about the rifle? Mr. Moore said, "There is also a secured hunting weapon hanging on Mr. Richardson's wall. The thing which is striking about this specific issue is that it contains a remarkable leap of logic. For instance, I am the owner of a 7.9 mm Mauser rifle which was the standard issue firearm for the German soldier in World War II. This weapon was procured by my father who served in Europe during the war. This weapon also hangs on the wall in my rec room. Does my ownership and display of this firearm lead one to the conclusion that I am a Nazi?"
The question Mr. Moore failed to answer is: "Is it a leap of logic for an abused woman to see the child's coffin and the rifle as more than furniture? Is there a message to the mother? The Shawnee District Court has missed many messages when it comes to the violence in this case.
When reading Court documents it is clear that attorneys have intentionally muddied the waters. It was a nasty divorce, those things happen. Eight or more attorneys, three different Judges and several Court Service workers have filed motion after motion. In the end a Judge wants to compel a dysfunctional family to be normal. It can't be done.
Halleck (Hal) Richardson and Claudine Dombrowski lived together for several months before they were married on November 22, 1995. Divorce papers were filed four month later. By this time records show Hal Richardson had abused Claudine and he had Domestic Battery and Criminal Damage to property convictions.
Hal had seven other convictions before 1995. The convictions were for Battery, Attempted Battery, Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer, Obstruction of Legal Process, Possession of Marijuana and an Open Container conviction.
Most of the Probation Conditions were never followed up on by court officials. After the Domestic Battery conviction, Hal was ordered to attend an "Alternatives to Battering Program" put on by the Battered Women Task Force in Topeka. A few of the comments made on Hal's report were: "Client rude and disrespectful to female co-facilitator as evidenced by his combative stance, his repeated interruptions, his sexist language and his refusal to accept any responsibility."
Another report stated: "Client very disruptive during group, this was evidenced by the fact that he interrupted the facilitator repeatedly by making rude comments, laughing and telling inappropriate sexist jokes."
And finally: "Called PO (probation officer) and client to tell them that he had graduated as far as I was concerned. He only has 17 sessions, but is causing too much trouble with his mouth. Terminated, with cause. Will not be accepted back."
The divorce proceedings were extended for eighteen months. Throughout the proceedings Claudine's attorneys filed numerous reports claiming violations of the restraining order and requesting an order to sever contact between Hal, Claudine and daughter Rikki.
The first involved an incident that both parties agreed in court happened, they just could not agree what happened. Claudine said she was hit in the head with a crow bar and Hal said it was a piece of wood. What ever he hit her with it took 24 stitches to close the head wounds.
At a hearing on June 17, 1996 Shawnee County District Court Judge Jan W. Leuenberger signed order giving custody of Rikki to Claudine and authorizing her to move to the Great Bend area so that "Ms. Dombrowski could avoid the history of physical and verbal abuse she had suffered from Mr. Richardson."
Hal was given supervised visitation.
As in many divorce cases the Judge on November 5, 1996 appointed Mr. Scott McKenzie, Attorney at Law, to serve as Guardian ad Litem to appear on behalf of Rikki. Mr. McKenzie was very experienced in juvenile court proceedings with more than 1,000 cases but this was only his sixth Guardian ad Litem. Under Mr. McKenzie direction visitation terms were worked out to where Claudine would keep Rikki for three weeks and then Hal would have her for a week.
Before the Divorce Trial started a new Judge took over. Judge James P. Buchele replaced Judge Leuenberger.
It is about this time the Court and Court appointed case workers attitude changed. Judge Buchele saw that fifty people were being called as witnesses for the trial. He placed a limit of five for each side. This can be done but it can cause problems. Court documents state: "These limits made it difficult or impossible for Ms. Dombrowski to bring in all of the witnesses to corroborate here clams." During the trial the Judge would not allow hearsay evidence but the proper witness was not there to testify.
At trial Mr. McKenzie indicated, "after reading the police reports of the violence, and the doctor's reports, he was not able to validate any of the truth of any of the accusations of violence made by Ms. Dombrowski."
When asked about Mr. Richardson's criminal history Mr. McKenzie recalled only a single offense for driving under the influence of alcohol, and was unaware of the misdemeanor convictions including the domestic violence battery against Claudine. He was unaware of a misdemeanor battery for a bar fight and the battery of a law enforcement officer.
Records of the Battered Women's Task Force had never been reviewed by Mr. McKenzie. Even thou Claudine had received support from the facility. In a report to the court Mr. McKenzie had recommended anger management therapy for Claudine but not for Hal.
In Judge Buchele's Orders after the trial he made it clear that he wanted more from this couple than what was possible. Here is what he wrote: "Mutual parental involvement with this child has been made worse by Ms. Dombrowski's unilateral decision to move to Larned, Kansas in May of 1996. The distance between Topeka and Larned makes it virtually impossible for an individual treater to work with the family; for Mr. Richardson to have regular and frequent contact with this child; to establish any reasonable dialogue between the parents toward resolving their conflicts. The move from Topeka to Larned, due to the proximity of the parties, has lessened the physical violence. It has, however, done violence to the relationship of Rikki and her father. If long distance visitation is continued, in the Court's view, will take its toll not only on Rikki but each of the parties. The Court specifically finds that separation of the child from either parent for long periods of time is harmful for a child of about three years of age."
He then went on to require Claudine to move back to the Topeka area.
And then Judge Buchele made a judgment that some Manhattan attorneys say is not legal. Judge Buchele ordered: "Further, respondent (Claudine) is directed to not call law enforcement authorities to investigate the petitioner (Hal) without first consulting with the case manager."
On December 14, 2000 after returning her daughter to her fathers home Claudine alleges that she was battered and raped by Hal. Under order not to call law enforcement authorities and with bleeding that would not stop, she drove to St. Marys, Kansas to get treatment. Claudine knew that if she had gone to a Topeka Hospital they would have called the police.
In St. Marys hospital officials did contact the Pottawatomie Sheriff and a report was made. She was advised that because the alleged event occurred in Shawnee County she would have to file there. Claudine said that because of the battery and rape she picked up Rikki the next day and did not return her. The Shawnee County Sheriff's Department was called and took Rikki back to Topeka. The court gave Hal custody and orders for her to attend Topeka schools.
As it stands now, Rikki is with her father in Topeka. Claudine gets two one-hour visits per week. The child will go to school in Topeka unless a new motion, which will be filed this week, is granted. The motion will request that Claudine be given custody and Rikki be allowed to attend school in Manhattan.
This case has received national attention by the National Organization for Women; the Judicial Initiative Commission Hearing by the Citizens for Good Judges and it was told to the Kansas Justice Commission in 1997.
A new Judge will be hearing the motion. Judge Richard D. Anderson took over the case on the retirement of Judge Buchele. But, unless Claudine receiveds help from Kansas citizens, the abuse will continue. In July of 2000 Judge Anderson reaffirmed all of Judge Buchele's previous orders. Evan the order to not call law enforcement authorities
Webmaster Note: You can contact Judge Richard D. Anderson at (785) 233-8200 ext. 4350
=====
Americans For Prosperity and Kansas Judges
http://www.patrioticthunder.com/localissues.html
The lady (Claudine Dombrowski)
in this picture was violently beaten by
Hal Richardson, the father of her baby and ex-husband. Now Hal Richardson isn't exactly going to win any father awards this year for this, and his criminal record keeps growing (Battery, Attempted Battery, Battery of a Law Enforcement Officer, Obstruction of Legal Process, Possession of Marijuana and violation of Open Container law.)
Shawnee County Judge James P. Buchele refused to permit testimony in this case because his docket was full. If that wasn't bad enough, Claudine was ordered by this Judge to move back to Shawnee County so Hal Richardson could be closer to her daughter and ordered her not to call the police when dealing with her husband, all calls had to go through her case manager first. Allegations of death threats, rape and the killing of her daughter were what the Judge was not letting get into testimony. Outrage, to say the least, read the harrowing account of a lawyers outrage in this matter here.
Okay, enough already, that last story is just wretched.
First off, ask yourself this question, do judges make bad decisions? Of course they do, just like anyone who makes a choice does. To be fair, judges make all kinds of decisions everyday that can effect you and I detrimentally as the reason your seeing the Judge. The problem isn't the Judges, it really lies with the criminal justice system in itself. Is it a perfect system, of course not, not everyone is going to agree on the outcome. However, the Judges need to police each other. Now we know, there is a state agency for that, but seriously, how many District Judges have been removed in Kansas from the Bench? One, and it was so long ago Kansas records can't even remember what he was removed for. Now if a Judge does make a bad decision as clearly stated in the cases above, should he/she be able to correct that decision, or are they to high and mighty to correct their injustice after they have had some time to reflect? Some would say that's what the court of appeals are for, but why, come on, why does it have to even go to something like that?
Common sense says if you rape a little girl or beat the hell out of your wife you shall get punished for that in a severe matter. However, the law states otherwise, and the list of outrage goes on.
