Having helped form the “Victims of Janelle Burrill Support Group”, Janelle has been stalking the group and this site. She or her representative misrepresented themselves as a victim and infiltrated the support group to gain information and further hurt her victims. She allegedly scared theSacramento-area radio station that interviewed protesters that were speaking out against her. She has been successful in have multiple people and websites gagged that were reporting on her activities and how they have affected many families, and more importantly children. She had her board certification revoked almost a year ago because of how she has handled her affairs. We all know from the California State audit of family courts how corruption has ruled when it has come to mediators, this is all an extension of it I would suppose.
Burrill has come from her computer desktop again, collecting files from this website, including information from the radio station who conducted interviews with protesters last year. She even downloaded a picture of Karen Anderson of the California Protective Parents Association as she stood in front of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington D.C. last October in another protest. Karen was one of the mothers featured in “Mothers Interrupted“, a news story about how Janelle Burrill destroyed five families (just five of many). Her favorite tool of legal abuse is the so-called “parental alienation syndrome.” The California Department of Consumer Affairs and the California Department of Justice, who have been investigating Burrill, need to know that she is continuing to stalk her victims. Here is what she was doing last night on this website…I don’t know who comes to this website unless they come from a company or an agency, like a certain visitor from the Executive Office of the President USA. But Janelle Burrill was easy to tell…she is actually coming from her desktop on her computer.
Navigation Path Date Time Type WebPage 9th February 2011 03:09:03 Page View No referring link /C:/Users/Janelle/Desktop/Janelle’s%20pdf.files/Rights%20for%20MothersResources..mht
23rd August 2010 08:33:53 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
21st September 2010 01:32:58 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
6th November 2010 04:16:21 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/guide.pdf
27th November 2010 03:21:30 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:22:08 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:22:34 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:24:10 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:28:00 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
17th December 2010 04:29:44 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/picket.jpg
3rd January 2011 00:09:51 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
3rd January 2011 00:12:36 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
3rd January 2011 00:17:39 Exit Link http://conferences.bwjp.org/webconferencedetail.aspx?confid=181
3rd January 2011 00:20:13 Exit Link http://www.protectiveparents.com/
12th January 2011 09:02:29 Exit Link http://www.protectiveparents.com/
12th January 2011 09:07:41 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104151885315&s=1188&
12th January 2011 09:08:07 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104151885315&s=1188&
12th January 2011 09:08:09 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104151885315&s=1188&
12th January 2011 09:09:27 Exit Link http://conferences.bwjp.org/webconferencedetail.aspx?confid=181
12th January 2011 09:14:00 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
12th January 2011 09:17:46 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/
12th January 2011 09:20:24 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/
12th January 2011 09:24:24 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwFSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:24:43 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwGSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:24:51 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwHSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:26:13 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwHSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:27:00 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
12th January 2011 09:29:12 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
16th January 2011 00:10:58 Exit Link http://autismcustodybattles.wordpress.com/
16th January 2011 00:13:03 Exit Link http://www.divorcecal.com/
16th January 2011 00:15:51 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188&
16th January 2011 00:21:57 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188&
16th January 2011 00:24:17 Exit Link mailto:cppa001@aol.com
16th January 2011 00:24:31 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188&
16th January 2011 00:26:46 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:26:47 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:27:11 Exit Link mailto:cppa001@aol.com
16th January 2011 00:27:17 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188
16th January 2011 00:30:43 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:30:44 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:39:33 Exit Link http://corruptioninthecourts.com/
16th January 2011 00:50:53 Exit Link http://batteredmotherscustodyconference.org/dvacc_book.htm
16th January 2011 00:52:34 Exit Link http://www.strengthenoursisters.org/
18th January 2011 15:09:03 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwFSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
18th January 2011 15:09:25 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwCSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
18th January 2011 15:09:48 Exit Link http://liarjanelleburrill.com/
18th January 2011 15:11:02 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
18th January 2011 15:29:50 Exit Link http://penalcodeviolators.com/
18th January 2011 21:34:10 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
18th January 2011 23:32:23 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
21st January 2011 00:33:31 Exit Link http://centerofjudicialexcellence.org/
21st January 2011 01:08:42 Exit Link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_qh-jX9qGk
21st January 2011 08:26:44 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=me65kybab&et=1104264052928&
21st January 2011 08:28:07 Exit Link http://mail.google.com/
21st January 2011 08:28:30 Exit Link http://www.blogger.com/
21st January 2011 08:29:04 Exit Link http://mail.google.com/
21st January 2011 08:30:37 Exit Link http://www.blogger.com/
21st January 2011 08:30:55 Exit Link mailto:rightsformothers@gmail.com
21st January 2011 08:34:47 Exit Link http://mail.google.com/
21st January 2011 08:35:31 Exit Link http://justice.posterous.com/family-law-domestic-violence-benchbooks
21st January 2011 08:36:42 Exit Link http://justice.posterous.com/family-law-domestic-violence-benchbooks
21st January 2011 08:44:43 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/kill.pdf
3rd February 2011 07:49:14 Exit Link mailto:rightsformothers@gmail.com
3rd February 2011 07:57:30 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/IMG00262-20101001-1128.jpg
Everyday we all hear about or read about divorcing couples fighting over who gets the kids. Fighting over their own children like they are some sort of property to be traded back and forth. There are many people that believe ALL mothers should always have custody with very little to no visitation for fathers; and likewise there are those out there that believe the opposite, ALL fathers should get custody and mothers should get little to no visitation.
Personally I don’t see how so many people can see this issue in such black and white terms. Not ALL mothers are good parents and not ALL fathers are good parents. For the most part the daily news will show us that most child abuse and child murders are committed by fathers, and yes, occasionally by mothers. This still doesn’t prove that ALL fathers are bad or good or that ALL mothers are bad or good.
In the last few years I have learned more about the Father’s Rights Movement, and I can say that I’m more than a little shocked at what I’ve learned. The Father’s Rights Advocates would have everyone believe that they are just concerned for fathers as a whole having shared or joint custody. They would have us believe that their number one concern is actually the children in divorces and custody cases. On the surface if one doesn’t dig too much that sounds wonderful.
However, when looked at further it is easily seen what the real agenda is for the Father’s Rights Movement. The further abuse and victimization of their ex-wives and children. Before I go any further here, I’d like to point out that I fully believe that good fathers have
sought out the assistance of the Father’s Rights Movement and one of two things happens... they either leave, frustrated and still alone in their plight OR they become enmeshed in the bitterness which abounds.
What I see out of Father’s Rights Advocates around the internet appears to be mostly just a bunch of men (and a few women that will do anything to get the attention or have a little power for themselves) who have been abusive in one way or another to the mother of their children and now feel that comfy rug of power and control being ripped from under their feet.
What better way to continue to abuse and control your victim when they walk away than to take possession of their children?
One main reason that I’ve formed the opinion that I have of the Father’s Rights Movement is because only abusers would look at the news we see of fathers murdering and abusing their kids and deny that it happens, or make excuses for it happening. The strict adherence to the ‘ALL fathers should have custody’ line that they feed everyone is the basis of my opinion that the majority of those in the movement are abusers grasping at keeping the power and control they had.
Here is an example, mind you... this is only one search, but there are many like this.
Why would someone look for this? Other than because they are contemplating attempting to gain custody through the Family Court just to get their ex-wife back under their power. This doesn’t sound like a man who loves his kids and wants the best for them, this sounds like a man who loves control and will use whatever means available to him to maintain or re-gain his power and control.
I never meant for this to be this long, so I will wrap this up by saying... not ALL men should have access to their children regardless of what the FR Advocates say. Likewise, I can admit that not ALL women that give birth are the best parent choice either. The natural equipment that we are born with which enables us to create life does NOT dictate how a person will be as a parent.
Since it is obvious that I have much more to say about this... there will be other posts on this subject.
Ok, so with that thought in mind I move on to part two of this topic, and oh yes there will be a part three... just don’t you worry.
As I was saying in part one, the people who make up the Father’s Rights Movement may not have started out where they have ended up. They originally may have been honestly good fathers and what they have morphed into is the result of many abusers jumping onboard and running away with the movement.
Along these lines the men in the FR Movement have touted and tried to throw in the face of all women (feminists, non-feminists, mothers and every one really) a quote from Gloria Steinem... attempting to ‘prove’ that even SHE sees their side of it, that fathers need to be equal in parenting... FR’s go on with that thought regardless of whether or not the father is abusive.
The quote I’m referring to is: “Women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
As far as I can find Gloria Steinem actually said this sentence twice, once in an interview published in the NY Daily News and once in an article she wrote which was published in the Opinion Section of the LA Times. The LA Times article is no longer available but I found the article copied here, so that I can still reference it.
In both cases the FR Movement refuses to take the quote in the context of what she was actually saying. Taking shit out of context is one of my biggest pet peeves and in this case shows how totally twisted they have actually gotten it.
In the interview, which was for the occasion of her 75th birthday, she was speaking in a general sense of women’s equality. What she actually said was:
“We’ve demonstrated that women can do what men do, but not yet that men can do what women do. That’s why most women have two jobs — one inside the home and one outside it — which is impossible. The truth is that women can’t be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
In the article she wrote for the LA Times she was speaking about Sarah Palin running for VP. What she actually said was:
Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.
Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.
And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.
She wasn’t saying that men should be equal in the home, thus supporting fathers being caregivers to young children then turning around and abusing them because they are not equipped to handle it. What she is saying is that women have TWO jobs, which are impossible to juggle from a man’s point of view... but that women do it everyday.
Yes, she does state that Obama and Biden were campaigning on their belief that men should, can and want to be home for their kids. She did NOT say she supports that... she specifically used the words “their belief”.
So, Father’s Rights Activists.... I ask you this, where exactly does Gloria Steinem say you should be allowed to stay home and not work while your children’s mom does and pays you child support to abuse your kids? I must have missed that.
I still stick to my opinion that most of those in the FR Movement are abusers trying to cram their ideological patriarchal power and control down everyone else’s throats.
As many are aware, there is a silent genocide occurring against women. This is part of a major reason why women all over the world are united to end violence against women. What many do not know or connect is that a lot of women experiencing violence perpetrated against them are also mothers. Many ads on stopping violence against women portray women without children as a means to get the message across clearly; but they fail to represent the large proportion of mothers in this situation.
Experts in intimate partner violence have noted that there is a high correlation between abuse and pregnancy. Some scholars state that this is because they are envious of the relationship between the mother and the child. Using violence, coercion and control is often part of the effort to destroy these bonds. The problem then exacerbates when a mother tries to leave--often not to save herself but to save the child. Leaving is one of the most dangerous times for all women enduring intimate partner violence, and, accompanied with an inadequate system, the odds are stacked against her. With a community plagued by stereotypes on child custody cases, closed courtrooms and loopholes in laws compounded by pop-psychology, we have a situation where most mothers in this predicament are torn away from the children they tried to protect. In the 1980s, Dr Richard Gardner coined the term, “Parent Alienation Syndrome”. This term remained a term only, because most of the scientific community rejected it. His literature promoted ideas that victims of abuse were mentally ill and deliberately raised concerns about the abuse as an act of hate. Dr Richard Gardner also testified in a homicide case where a mother was shot 13 times. Gardner claimed that her “alienating behavior” drove him to kill her. Although the scientific community rejected Parent Alienation Syndrome, the legal community embraced it. Carefully removing the word "syndrome", the belief set remained. Whilst his work began in US, he traveled around the world promoting these ideas to court professionals and others who had a direct influence on child custody case outcomes. Some organizations that offer training for judges even held workshops on “maternal gate-keeping”, which trivialized the experiences of women and children leaving intimate partner violence. Whilst Dr. Gardner passed away several years ago, his doctrine lives on and others have polished up his work to continue its grave influence upon the legal community.
Mothers are often subjected to degrading treatment within the courtrooms where they are forced to deny their experiences and their need to survive and protect--or they will face jail. All legal avenues within this culture are blocked. This is why we have a battered mothers custody conference where mothers, professionals and young people unite to end violence against women and children through the system. It is why I traveled all the way from Australia to be there this year amongst others who have also traveled from other parts of the globe to attend. It is a global issue that affects many. This year, Holly Ann Collins, the first American to receive asylum in Netherlands, spoke about her ordeal. Revered by many as a brave mother who, against all odds, was able to save herself and her children. She was listed and hunted by US as an abductor even though they knew why she ran. She arrived at the airport with a suitcase of evidence which led to her being granted asylum. She was hard on herself because she did not do it sooner. Whilst leaving with the children under these circumstances should be seen as the best thing to do, there is no legal avenue to do so. Some laws and treaties appear from the surface to have some consideration of women and children experiencing violence, but the processes, culture, economics and ambiguity of the situation stifle opportunities to do so. Holly Ann Collins' outcome is a rare one. We need better laws that protect mothers and children from violence without punishment or further victimization.
As many are aware, there is a silent genocide occurring against women. This is part of a major reason why women all over the world are united to end violence against women. What many do not know or connect is that a lot of women experiencing violence perpetrated against them are also mothers. Many ads on stopping violence against women portray women without children as a means to get the message across clearly; but they fail to represent the large proportion of mothers in this situation.
Experts in intimate partner violence have noted that there is a high correlation between abuse and pregnancy. Some scholars state that this is because they are envious of the relationship between the mother and the child. Using violence, coercion and control is often part of the effort to destroy these bonds. The problem then exacerbates when a mother tries to leave--often not to save herself but to save the child. Leaving is one of the most dangerous times for all women enduring intimate partner violence, and, accompanied with an inadequate system, the odds are stacked against her. With a community plagued by stereotypes on child custody cases, closed courtrooms and loopholes in laws compounded by pop-psychology, we have a situation where most mothers in this predicament are torn away from the children they tried to protect. In the 1980s, Dr Richard Gardner coined the term, “Parent Alienation Syndrome”. This term remained a term only, because most of the scientific community rejected it. His literature promoted ideas that victims of abuse were mentally ill and deliberately raised concerns about the abuse as an act of hate. Dr Richard Gardner also testified in a homicide case where a mother was shot 13 times. Gardner claimed that her “alienating behavior” drove him to kill her. Although the scientific community rejected Parent Alienation Syndrome, the legal community embraced it. Carefully removing the word "syndrome", the belief set remained. Whilst his work began in US, he traveled around the world promoting these ideas to court professionals and others who had a direct influence on child custody case outcomes. Some organizations that offer training for judges even held workshops on “maternal gate-keeping”, which trivialized the experiences of women and children leaving intimate partner violence. Whilst Dr. Gardner passed away several years ago, his doctrine lives on and others have polished up his work to continue its grave influence upon the legal community.
Mothers are often subjected to degrading treatment within the courtrooms where they are forced to deny their experiences and their need to survive and protect--or they will face jail. All legal avenues within this culture are blocked. This is why we have a battered mothers custody conference where mothers, professionals and young people unite to end violence against women and children through the system. It is why I traveled all the way from Australia to be there this year amongst others who have also traveled from other parts of the globe to attend. It is a global issue that affects many. This year, Holly Ann Collins, the first American to receive asylum in Netherlands, spoke about her ordeal. Revered by many as a brave mother who, against all odds, was able to save herself and her children. She was listed and hunted by US as an abductor even though they knew why she ran. She arrived at the airport with a suitcase of evidence which led to her being granted asylum. She was hard on herself because she did not do it sooner. Whilst leaving with the children under these circumstances should be seen as the best thing to do, there is no legal avenue to do so. Some laws and treaties appear from the surface to have some consideration of women and children experiencing violence, but the processes, culture, economics and ambiguity of the situation stifle opportunities to do so. Holly Ann Collins' outcome is a rare one. We need better laws that protect mothers and children from violence without punishment or further victimization.
A report out by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on the Women’s Health website details the effects of violence on women. Here is an excerpt of the report…an excerpt I found particularly interesting because it discusses women that abuse children. This is enlightening to discover this:
Impact on children
Violence against women can also impact children. About 50 percent of men who assault their wives also physically abuse their children. Also, women who are abused are more likely to abuse their children. And children can be injured during violence between their parents. Studies show children who witness or experience violence at home may have long-term physical, emotional, and social problems. They are also more likely to experience or commit violence in the future. Protect your children by getting help for yourself.
Common physical injuries and health problems from violence include: • Increased risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV, which can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease and a higher risk of cervical cancer • Unwanted pregnancies, or rapid, repeat pregnancies • Miscarriages and other reproductive problems • Vaginal bleeding or pelvic pain • Injuries such as bruises, cuts, broken bones, or internal damage • Back or neck pain • Chronic pain syndrome • Trouble sleeping and nightmares • High blood pressure or chest pain • Arthritis • High stress and lowered immune system • Central nervous system problems, such as headaches, seizures, or nerve damage • Respiratory problems, such as asthma and shortness of breath • Digestive problems, such as stomach ulcers and nausea
To download a copy of the report, which discusses a wide range of overall health effects for being a victim of domestic violence, please click here.
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.”
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
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.
Having helped form the “Victims of Janelle Burrill Support Group”, Janelle has been stalking the group and this site. She or her representative misrepresented themselves as a victim and infiltrated the support group to gain information and further hurt her victims. She allegedly scared theSacramento-area radio station that interviewed protesters that were speaking out against her. She has been successful in have multiple people and websites gagged that were reporting on her activities and how they have affected many families, and more importantly children. She had her board certification revoked almost a year ago because of how she has handled her affairs. We all know from the California State audit of family courts how corruption has ruled when it has come to mediators, this is all an extension of it I would suppose.
Burrill has come from her computer desktop again, collecting files from this website, including information from the radio station who conducted interviews with protesters last year. She even downloaded a picture of Karen Anderson of the California Protective Parents Association as she stood in front of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington D.C. last October in another protest. Karen was one of the mothers featured in “Mothers Interrupted“, a news story about how Janelle Burrill destroyed five families (just five of many). Her favorite tool of legal abuse is the so-called “parental alienation syndrome.” The California Department of Consumer Affairs and the California Department of Justice, who have been investigating Burrill, need to know that she is continuing to stalk her victims. Here is what she was doing last night on this website…I don’t know who comes to this website unless they come from a company or an agency, like a certain visitor from the Executive Office of the President USA. But Janelle Burrill was easy to tell…she is actually coming from her desktop on her computer.
Navigation Path Date Time Type WebPage 9th February 2011 03:09:03 Page View No referring link /C:/Users/Janelle/Desktop/Janelle’s%20pdf.files/Rights%20for%20MothersResources..mht
23rd August 2010 08:33:53 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
21st September 2010 01:32:58 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
6th November 2010 04:16:21 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/guide.pdf
27th November 2010 03:21:30 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:22:08 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:22:34 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:24:10 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
27th November 2010 03:28:00 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
17th December 2010 04:29:44 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/picket.jpg
3rd January 2011 00:09:51 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
3rd January 2011 00:12:36 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
3rd January 2011 00:17:39 Exit Link http://conferences.bwjp.org/webconferencedetail.aspx?confid=181
3rd January 2011 00:20:13 Exit Link http://www.protectiveparents.com/
12th January 2011 09:02:29 Exit Link http://www.protectiveparents.com/
12th January 2011 09:07:41 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104151885315&s=1188&
12th January 2011 09:08:07 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104151885315&s=1188&
12th January 2011 09:08:09 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104151885315&s=1188&
12th January 2011 09:09:27 Exit Link http://conferences.bwjp.org/webconferencedetail.aspx?confid=181
12th January 2011 09:14:00 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
12th January 2011 09:17:46 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/
12th January 2011 09:20:24 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/
12th January 2011 09:24:24 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwFSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:24:43 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwGSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:24:51 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwHSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:26:13 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwHSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
12th January 2011 09:27:00 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
12th January 2011 09:29:12 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
16th January 2011 00:10:58 Exit Link http://autismcustodybattles.wordpress.com/
16th January 2011 00:13:03 Exit Link http://www.divorcecal.com/
16th January 2011 00:15:51 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188&
16th January 2011 00:21:57 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188&
16th January 2011 00:24:17 Exit Link mailto:cppa001@aol.com
16th January 2011 00:24:31 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188&
16th January 2011 00:26:46 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:26:47 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:27:11 Exit Link mailto:cppa001@aol.com
16th January 2011 00:27:17 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=im7hdldab&et=1104250940406&s=1188
16th January 2011 00:30:43 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:30:44 Exit Link http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1001-1050/ab_1050_bill_20100827_chaptered.html
16th January 2011 00:39:33 Exit Link http://corruptioninthecourts.com/
16th January 2011 00:50:53 Exit Link http://batteredmotherscustodyconference.org/dvacc_book.htm
16th January 2011 00:52:34 Exit Link http://www.strengthenoursisters.org/
18th January 2011 15:09:03 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwFSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
18th January 2011 15:09:25 Exit Link http://207.150.195.41/lists/lt.php?id=fB8KB1hQCVwCSAIFWwRbTgFUVVMFBA%3D%3D
18th January 2011 15:09:48 Exit Link http://liarjanelleburrill.com/
18th January 2011 15:11:02 Exit Link http://kfbk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=172730&article=7444908
18th January 2011 15:29:50 Exit Link http://penalcodeviolators.com/
18th January 2011 21:34:10 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
18th January 2011 23:32:23 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/KFBK-Rpt-08-05-10.wma
21st January 2011 00:33:31 Exit Link http://centerofjudicialexcellence.org/
21st January 2011 01:08:42 Exit Link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_qh-jX9qGk
21st January 2011 08:26:44 Exit Link http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=me65kybab&et=1104264052928&
21st January 2011 08:28:07 Exit Link http://mail.google.com/
21st January 2011 08:28:30 Exit Link http://www.blogger.com/
21st January 2011 08:29:04 Exit Link http://mail.google.com/
21st January 2011 08:30:37 Exit Link http://www.blogger.com/
21st January 2011 08:30:55 Exit Link mailto:rightsformothers@gmail.com
21st January 2011 08:34:47 Exit Link http://mail.google.com/
21st January 2011 08:35:31 Exit Link http://justice.posterous.com/family-law-domestic-violence-benchbooks
21st January 2011 08:36:42 Exit Link http://justice.posterous.com/family-law-domestic-violence-benchbooks
21st January 2011 08:44:43 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/kill.pdf
3rd February 2011 07:49:14 Exit Link mailto:rightsformothers@gmail.com
3rd February 2011 07:57:30 Download http://rightsformothers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/IMG00262-20101001-1128.jpg
Everyday we all hear about or read about divorcing couples fighting over who gets the kids. Fighting over their own children like they are some sort of property to be traded back and forth. There are many people that believe ALL mothers should always have custody with very little to no visitation for fathers; and likewise there are those out there that believe the opposite, ALL fathers should get custody and mothers should get little to no visitation.
Personally I don’t see how so many people can see this issue in such black and white terms. Not ALL mothers are good parents and not ALL fathers are good parents. For the most part the daily news will show us that most child abuse and child murders are committed by fathers, and yes, occasionally by mothers. This still doesn’t prove that ALL fathers are bad or good or that ALL mothers are bad or good.
In the last few years I have learned more about the Father’s Rights Movement, and I can say that I’m more than a little shocked at what I’ve learned. The Father’s Rights Advocates would have everyone believe that they are just concerned for fathers as a whole having shared or joint custody. They would have us believe that their number one concern is actually the children in divorces and custody cases. On the surface if one doesn’t dig too much that sounds wonderful.
However, when looked at further it is easily seen what the real agenda is for the Father’s Rights Movement. The further abuse and victimization of their ex-wives and children. Before I go any further here, I’d like to point out that I fully believe that good fathers have
sought out the assistance of the Father’s Rights Movement and one of two things happens... they either leave, frustrated and still alone in their plight OR they become enmeshed in the bitterness which abounds.
What I see out of Father’s Rights Advocates around the internet appears to be mostly just a bunch of men (and a few women that will do anything to get the attention or have a little power for themselves) who have been abusive in one way or another to the mother of their children and now feel that comfy rug of power and control being ripped from under their feet.
What better way to continue to abuse and control your victim when they walk away than to take possession of their children?
One main reason that I’ve formed the opinion that I have of the Father’s Rights Movement is because only abusers would look at the news we see of fathers murdering and abusing their kids and deny that it happens, or make excuses for it happening. The strict adherence to the ‘ALL fathers should have custody’ line that they feed everyone is the basis of my opinion that the majority of those in the movement are abusers grasping at keeping the power and control they had.
Here is an example, mind you... this is only one search, but there are many like this.
Why would someone look for this? Other than because they are contemplating attempting to gain custody through the Family Court just to get their ex-wife back under their power. This doesn’t sound like a man who loves his kids and wants the best for them, this sounds like a man who loves control and will use whatever means available to him to maintain or re-gain his power and control.
I never meant for this to be this long, so I will wrap this up by saying... not ALL men should have access to their children regardless of what the FR Advocates say. Likewise, I can admit that not ALL women that give birth are the best parent choice either. The natural equipment that we are born with which enables us to create life does NOT dictate how a person will be as a parent.
Since it is obvious that I have much more to say about this... there will be other posts on this subject.
Ok, so with that thought in mind I move on to part two of this topic, and oh yes there will be a part three... just don’t you worry.
As I was saying in part one, the people who make up the Father’s Rights Movement may not have started out where they have ended up. They originally may have been honestly good fathers and what they have morphed into is the result of many abusers jumping onboard and running away with the movement.
Along these lines the men in the FR Movement have touted and tried to throw in the face of all women (feminists, non-feminists, mothers and every one really) a quote from Gloria Steinem... attempting to ‘prove’ that even SHE sees their side of it, that fathers need to be equal in parenting... FR’s go on with that thought regardless of whether or not the father is abusive.
The quote I’m referring to is: “Women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
As far as I can find Gloria Steinem actually said this sentence twice, once in an interview published in the NY Daily News and once in an article she wrote which was published in the Opinion Section of the LA Times. The LA Times article is no longer available but I found the article copied here, so that I can still reference it.
In both cases the FR Movement refuses to take the quote in the context of what she was actually saying. Taking shit out of context is one of my biggest pet peeves and in this case shows how totally twisted they have actually gotten it.
In the interview, which was for the occasion of her 75th birthday, she was speaking in a general sense of women’s equality. What she actually said was:
“We’ve demonstrated that women can do what men do, but not yet that men can do what women do. That’s why most women have two jobs — one inside the home and one outside it — which is impossible. The truth is that women can’t be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”
In the article she wrote for the LA Times she was speaking about Sarah Palin running for VP. What she actually said was:
Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.
Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.
And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.
She wasn’t saying that men should be equal in the home, thus supporting fathers being caregivers to young children then turning around and abusing them because they are not equipped to handle it. What she is saying is that women have TWO jobs, which are impossible to juggle from a man’s point of view... but that women do it everyday.
Yes, she does state that Obama and Biden were campaigning on their belief that men should, can and want to be home for their kids. She did NOT say she supports that... she specifically used the words “their belief”.
So, Father’s Rights Activists.... I ask you this, where exactly does Gloria Steinem say you should be allowed to stay home and not work while your children’s mom does and pays you child support to abuse your kids? I must have missed that.
I still stick to my opinion that most of those in the FR Movement are abusers trying to cram their ideological patriarchal power and control down everyone else’s throats.
As many are aware, there is a silent genocide occurring against women. This is part of a major reason why women all over the world are united to end violence against women. What many do not know or connect is that a lot of women experiencing violence perpetrated against them are also mothers. Many ads on stopping violence against women portray women without children as a means to get the message across clearly; but they fail to represent the large proportion of mothers in this situation.
Experts in intimate partner violence have noted that there is a high correlation between abuse and pregnancy. Some scholars state that this is because they are envious of the relationship between the mother and the child. Using violence, coercion and control is often part of the effort to destroy these bonds. The problem then exacerbates when a mother tries to leave--often not to save herself but to save the child. Leaving is one of the most dangerous times for all women enduring intimate partner violence, and, accompanied with an inadequate system, the odds are stacked against her. With a community plagued by stereotypes on child custody cases, closed courtrooms and loopholes in laws compounded by pop-psychology, we have a situation where most mothers in this predicament are torn away from the children they tried to protect. In the 1980s, Dr Richard Gardner coined the term, “Parent Alienation Syndrome”. This term remained a term only, because most of the scientific community rejected it. His literature promoted ideas that victims of abuse were mentally ill and deliberately raised concerns about the abuse as an act of hate. Dr Richard Gardner also testified in a homicide case where a mother was shot 13 times. Gardner claimed that her “alienating behavior” drove him to kill her. Although the scientific community rejected Parent Alienation Syndrome, the legal community embraced it. Carefully removing the word "syndrome", the belief set remained. Whilst his work began in US, he traveled around the world promoting these ideas to court professionals and others who had a direct influence on child custody case outcomes. Some organizations that offer training for judges even held workshops on “maternal gate-keeping”, which trivialized the experiences of women and children leaving intimate partner violence. Whilst Dr. Gardner passed away several years ago, his doctrine lives on and others have polished up his work to continue its grave influence upon the legal community.
Mothers are often subjected to degrading treatment within the courtrooms where they are forced to deny their experiences and their need to survive and protect--or they will face jail. All legal avenues within this culture are blocked. This is why we have a battered mothers custody conference where mothers, professionals and young people unite to end violence against women and children through the system. It is why I traveled all the way from Australia to be there this year amongst others who have also traveled from other parts of the globe to attend. It is a global issue that affects many. This year, Holly Ann Collins, the first American to receive asylum in Netherlands, spoke about her ordeal. Revered by many as a brave mother who, against all odds, was able to save herself and her children. She was listed and hunted by US as an abductor even though they knew why she ran. She arrived at the airport with a suitcase of evidence which led to her being granted asylum. She was hard on herself because she did not do it sooner. Whilst leaving with the children under these circumstances should be seen as the best thing to do, there is no legal avenue to do so. Some laws and treaties appear from the surface to have some consideration of women and children experiencing violence, but the processes, culture, economics and ambiguity of the situation stifle opportunities to do so. Holly Ann Collins' outcome is a rare one. We need better laws that protect mothers and children from violence without punishment or further victimization.
As many are aware, there is a silent genocide occurring against women. This is part of a major reason why women all over the world are united to end violence against women. What many do not know or connect is that a lot of women experiencing violence perpetrated against them are also mothers. Many ads on stopping violence against women portray women without children as a means to get the message across clearly; but they fail to represent the large proportion of mothers in this situation.
Experts in intimate partner violence have noted that there is a high correlation between abuse and pregnancy. Some scholars state that this is because they are envious of the relationship between the mother and the child. Using violence, coercion and control is often part of the effort to destroy these bonds. The problem then exacerbates when a mother tries to leave--often not to save herself but to save the child. Leaving is one of the most dangerous times for all women enduring intimate partner violence, and, accompanied with an inadequate system, the odds are stacked against her. With a community plagued by stereotypes on child custody cases, closed courtrooms and loopholes in laws compounded by pop-psychology, we have a situation where most mothers in this predicament are torn away from the children they tried to protect. In the 1980s, Dr Richard Gardner coined the term, “Parent Alienation Syndrome”. This term remained a term only, because most of the scientific community rejected it. His literature promoted ideas that victims of abuse were mentally ill and deliberately raised concerns about the abuse as an act of hate. Dr Richard Gardner also testified in a homicide case where a mother was shot 13 times. Gardner claimed that her “alienating behavior” drove him to kill her. Although the scientific community rejected Parent Alienation Syndrome, the legal community embraced it. Carefully removing the word "syndrome", the belief set remained. Whilst his work began in US, he traveled around the world promoting these ideas to court professionals and others who had a direct influence on child custody case outcomes. Some organizations that offer training for judges even held workshops on “maternal gate-keeping”, which trivialized the experiences of women and children leaving intimate partner violence. Whilst Dr. Gardner passed away several years ago, his doctrine lives on and others have polished up his work to continue its grave influence upon the legal community.
Mothers are often subjected to degrading treatment within the courtrooms where they are forced to deny their experiences and their need to survive and protect--or they will face jail. All legal avenues within this culture are blocked. This is why we have a battered mothers custody conference where mothers, professionals and young people unite to end violence against women and children through the system. It is why I traveled all the way from Australia to be there this year amongst others who have also traveled from other parts of the globe to attend. It is a global issue that affects many. This year, Holly Ann Collins, the first American to receive asylum in Netherlands, spoke about her ordeal. Revered by many as a brave mother who, against all odds, was able to save herself and her children. She was listed and hunted by US as an abductor even though they knew why she ran. She arrived at the airport with a suitcase of evidence which led to her being granted asylum. She was hard on herself because she did not do it sooner. Whilst leaving with the children under these circumstances should be seen as the best thing to do, there is no legal avenue to do so. Some laws and treaties appear from the surface to have some consideration of women and children experiencing violence, but the processes, culture, economics and ambiguity of the situation stifle opportunities to do so. Holly Ann Collins' outcome is a rare one. We need better laws that protect mothers and children from violence without punishment or further victimization.
A report out by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on the Women’s Health website details the effects of violence on women. Here is an excerpt of the report…an excerpt I found particularly interesting because it discusses women that abuse children. This is enlightening to discover this:
Impact on children
Violence against women can also impact children. About 50 percent of men who assault their wives also physically abuse their children. Also, women who are abused are more likely to abuse their children. And children can be injured during violence between their parents. Studies show children who witness or experience violence at home may have long-term physical, emotional, and social problems. They are also more likely to experience or commit violence in the future. Protect your children by getting help for yourself.
Common physical injuries and health problems from violence include: • Increased risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV, which can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease and a higher risk of cervical cancer • Unwanted pregnancies, or rapid, repeat pregnancies • Miscarriages and other reproductive problems • Vaginal bleeding or pelvic pain • Injuries such as bruises, cuts, broken bones, or internal damage • Back or neck pain • Chronic pain syndrome • Trouble sleeping and nightmares • High blood pressure or chest pain • Arthritis • High stress and lowered immune system • Central nervous system problems, such as headaches, seizures, or nerve damage • Respiratory problems, such as asthma and shortness of breath • Digestive problems, such as stomach ulcers and nausea
To download a copy of the report, which discusses a wide range of overall health effects for being a victim of domestic violence, please click here.
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.”
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
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.
Posted in 
