Misogyny as Diagnosis and Ruling in St. Louis County

Brian Dunlop from his law firm website

 

As my investigation of St. Louis County continues there is a name which has stayed largely under the radar, which deserves more scrutiny: Brian Dunlop. 

Dunlop is an attorney and Guardian ad Litem in St. Louis County, and he's already the subject of a critical website entitled, "My Case With Brian Dunlop".

At the site, a male litigant describes how Dunlop violated numerous procedures in a blatantly biased manner and steered the case so that his ex-wife got physical custody unfairly, while he was rendered with a custody arrangement which was impossible to manage. 

In one especially egregious event, Dunlop allowed for the man's daughter to be questioned alone by his ex-wife's attorney for a half hour shortly before a court hearing. 

Approximately 30 minutes prior to my daughter taking the stand in trial, Brian Dunlop approved a request by Mother’s attorney to question my daughter alone and without counsel (that being Brian Dunlop) present. My daughter had wanted nothing to do with Mother’s current suit. Brian fully knew this. He definitely knew that she did not want to be trapped into an interrogation by her attorney. My daughter was completely intimidated in this spontaneous interrogation. My daughter had no idea that she could leave at any time because Brian Dunlop failed to tell her. She further had no idea that she did not have to answer any of the questions because Brian Dunlop failed to tell her. Given that her “guardian” had led her into this slaughter without any advice, she had no way of knowing what rights she did or did not have. Further, it wasn’t like Mother’s attorney was some rookie that just passed the bar. Mother’s attorney had previously served on the family court bench for over 20 years and is fully seasoned at the art of intimidation. That’s right. My 13 year old daughter was left alone in a room to be grilled by one of the most experienced, ruthless, and vicious family law attorney’s Missouri has to offer right before taking the stand as a witness. All this was made possible by Brian Dunlop serving as the great protector of my children during court proceedings.

Dunlop also violated privacy laws, he alleged. 

Fact:  Brian stated to both of my children upon meeting them that whatever they chose to share with him would be privileged/confidential.  After one of our trial dates, Brian shared with me some thoughts/opinions the children had shared with him regarding me.  I would not categorize them as negative, but more of a personal nature.  Until Brian told me these thoughts/opinions that my children personally and confidentially shared with him, I had not known them.

Opinion:  Privilege/confidentiality is the foundation of our entire legal system.  Without it, we have no legal system.  This meant nothing to Brian when it came to preserving my children’s rights and the promise he made to them.  I assure you there were plenty of negative comments they had to say about their mother.  Given the open book that resulted from their meetings, I wonder what he told their mother about the discussions he had with my children.  That would not be good at all, but apparently that is no concern to Brian. 

This second violation appears to be part of another pattern of behavior by St. Louis County Deep State actors. 

In the now much talked about lawsuit filed by Evita Tolu, the lawsuit also alleges that several court actors violated privacy rights by sharing privileged information.  

In that lawsuit, Elaine Pudlowski, the GAL in that case, released without authorization a psychological evaluation.

Dunlop and the alleged Child Molestation Case

Dunlop also plays a significant role in another alleged child molestation case. 

This Dunlop case fits several emerging patterns within St. Louis County.  As in Tolu's case and several others, the child disclosed sexual abuse by her father; as in those cases, Dunlop and others covered up the sexual abuse. 

The mother was psychologically evaluated by Dr. James Reid and he diagnosed her with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and subsequently accused her of parental alienation (PA). 

That PA would take on the form of coaching her daughter to say abuse.

She told me she is one of four people, including Tolu, to be diagnosed with BPD and PA by Reid; abuse was alleged in all the cases, and the PA coaching would explain the abuse. 

Tolu's lawsuit lists nearly ten cases with a similar pattern, involving Reid.

Here is the two part interview with this St. Louis County mom.  

Part 1

 

 Part 2

 

 Dunlop used Reid's evaluation to switch custody in an emergency manner and cut off all contact between mother and daughter just as her daughter was beginning to disclose. 

In the Tolu case, the lawsuit notes that her daughter disclosed the abuse to various law enforcement and authorities. Regarding Reid, the lawsuit states, "by failing and refusing to investigate and account for a well-known pattern of domestic violence abuse by {Tolu's ex}, contained in 7 DFS investigations, an Olivette Police Report, medical and therapy records."

DFS refers to the Department of Family Services, or social services in Missouri. 

In this case involving Dunlop, the child disclosed to numerous authorities including the police and DFS. 

In the DFS report, her daughter stated that, "her daddy touches her private parts. {The daughter} identified her privates as her vaginal area...{the daughter}disclosed that he touches her privates 'in the middle and all around the outside too.' with his fingers and described it as skin to skin contact."

Despite this graphic description, DFS concluded there was insufficient evidence to establish there was abuse. 

Dr. James Reid

While I and others who have examined St. Louis County have thus far placed the primary focus on Elaine Pudlowski- a prominent GAL and attorney in the county- Dr. James Reid appears to be a primary cog in the wheel which has formed to create these schemes in the county. 

He was identified as the evaluator on twelve cases also involving Pudlowski in Tolu's lawsuit. 

In Dunlop's case, the mother told me she paid approximately $1,600 to Reid in her case and that her ex paid at least that much, but Dr. Reid can make much more than that. 

In Tolu's lawsuit, Reid initially charged $30,000 for his evaluation and then continued adding charges for being deposed, producing documents, and other matters. 

In that role, he is constantly asked to cover up for abuse and instead label the protective parent- primarily the mother- with some sort of label like BPD.

He has some Modus Operandi, while at other times, he picks and chooses his tactics. 

As one example, he will ignore, misinterpret, or fail to do basic testing required for his diagnosis.

Here is part of Tolu's lawsuit, "By failing to use MMPI assessments specifically designed to account for Plaintiff's cultural background of being born and raised in the former Soviet Union. By failing to assessments specifically designed for family custody litigants with children."

In the same way, Reid ignored MMPI and other testing in Dunlop's case. 

"My MMPI and PAI- all my test scores say I'm extremely adjusted to life," The woman from Dunlop's case stated in the interview. 

MMPI stands for Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, and the right test score often is indicative of BPD. 

"On mine he listed all the symptoms of a person with BPD and said I had it, but he didn't ever connect any of the symptoms to anything I do," She said further.

The Tolu lawsuit also stated this, "On numerous occasions during Plaintiff's meeting with Reid, Reid called Plaintiff a 'drunk' and an 'alcoholic' even though Reid knew Plaintiff does not drink alcoholic beverages."

"{Reid} recommended I get counseling for alcohol abuse bc I have a cocktail about once a week." The woman from Dunlop's case stated, echoing that pattern.

The Tolu lawsuit continued, "Reid called Plaintiff 'a bad mother' and 'a liar'. Reid accused Plaintiff of 'perjuring the court', 'defrauding court', 'defrauding an adoption agency', 'misleading the court', 'lying to her attorney', being 'deceitful' and 'manipulative.'"

Also in the lawsuit, Tolu accused Reid of bullying her to the point of tears.

In other cases, he did not exhibit bullying behavior. The woman who had Dunlop said Reid never tried to bully her.

In Tolu's lawsuit, Dr. Reid was also accused of being court ordered to only do a psychological evaluation, but providing custody recommendations, making it a custody evaluation.

Reid stuck only to doing a psychological evaluation in the Dunlop case, but it was so one sided, it was all Dunlop needed to make the draconian recommendations which have totally separated her from her daughter for over three years.

Also, while Reid primarily seems to first diagnose women with BPD and then accuse them of parental alienation, even this pattern is not totally rigid.

In one case cited in Tolu's lawsuit, Reid and others, rather than diagnosing the woman with BPD, instead diagnosed her as delusional, while the rest of the pattern largely remained them same. Here is part of the lawsuit.

Another parent told Plaintiff that Pudlowski recommended that Court award custody to a father despite the father's record of medical abuse and neglect of the children. Pudlowski also interfered with the DFS investigation in that case and never reported to the court the scientific evidence which proved children were poisoned. Pudlowski talked about this case with Plaintiff and told Plaintiff that Reid, Van Luven, and WCPA diagnosed mother to be delusional. Pudlowski disclosed the mother's protected private medical to Plaintiff, who Plaintiff did not know at the time, in violation of the Court orders in that case.

Pudlowski disclosed private medical information in four cases cited in the lawsuit; in this case, Pudlowski used Reid's delusional diagnosis to recommend sole custody to the father, according to the lawsuit.  

Judge Mondonna Ghasedi 

The judge in the Dunlop case is Mondonna Ghasedi. She went along with everything Reid and Dunlop claimed; in an emergency fashion and without holding a hearing, Ghasedi changed custody and barred the girl's mother from seeing her daughter entirely on October 17, 2017.

She said that Judge Ghasedi referred to her as "despicable" when the court went off the record.

There is very little available on Judge Ghasedi.

The judicial rating website The Robing Room currently has no ratings. Her name comes up in a couple cases covered by the news but only in an ancillary fashion.

She is also the subject of this bit of publicity done by the public affairs arm of the courts.

The St. Louis County Circuit Court has received a three-year, $400,000 grant from the Sidney R. Baer, Jr. Foundation to expand access to justice for civil and criminal defendants with mental illness. The grant will also be used to create a new mental health resource center in the courthouse, providing access to comprehensive services for individuals with mental illness and their families.

The concept for the mental health initiative was developed by Judge Mondonna Ghasedi and Judge Michael Burton in response to the large number of criminal, civil, domestic and family law cases in St. Louis County involving individuals with mental illness.

“Our Court is passionately committed to helping those who suffer from mental illness navigate the legal system,” Judge Ghasedi said. “That process can be confusing, costly and stressful under the best of circumstances, but for those with untreated mental health issues, it is a nearly insurmountable task. With additional resources from the Baer Foundation, we will be able to help many more litigants – and their families – get the legal, social and medical assistance they desperately need.”

That bit of public relations was produced by Christine Bertelson, the public affairs officer for Missouri Courts. 

I have asked Ms. Bertelson several questions, including for this article. She initially brushed off any allegations against Pudlowski stating, "I cannot comment on blanket assertions about the court."

She has declined further comment, even as evidence has been mounting. Judge Ghasedi did not respond to an email for comment.

Dr. Reid did not respond to a voicemail; his attorney in his lawsuit with Evita Tolu did not respond to an email for comment and Dunlop did not respond to an email for comment. 

Sharon Remis

Another interesting name which pops up on Dunlop's case is Sharon Remis. 

Remis participated in the now infamous Zoom conference of- as reported in the conference- thirty-eight St. Louis County GALs; Dunlop did not participate in the call, though his name was mentioned as needing to receive a briefing of the call. The call is below.    

On the day Judge Ghasedi switched custody in that Dunlop case, Remis appears to have kept the woman and her mother in a separate room and in the dark on what was happening. 

Remis did not inform her that an emergency protective order had been granted by the judge, or that she was not even allowed to say goodbye to her daughter. 

Remis kept her and her mother in the room while her daughter was removed from the courthouse forcefully. 

Remis was an active participant in the call and one particular portion shows just how much coordination she, the other GALs, and some of the judges seem to have. 

Sarah Pleban, the most active participant, at approximately nine minutes raises "Sarah Moller's case".

This is a case that Remis appears to be familiar with.

"Larry got the call from the other attorney, so he can give you more details....Because I've been involved with Judge Burton, I put in a call to Judge Burton so he could look into that."

Judge Burton, is Judge Michael Burton of the now infamous email which he sent to Pleban and a GAL group. That email is below.  He also appears with Judge Ghasedi in her press release. 

Judge Burton's Email Ex... by mikekvolpe

Ms. Remis did not respond to my email for comment. 

Post Script

Check out the previous article I did on St. Louis County. Also, check out the crowdfunding campaign if you think more articles like these need to be written.