Things got confrontational between me and a judge in Monmouth County, New Jersey.
On April 26, 2021, at approximately 7:30AM Central Time, I attempted to listen in to the docket of
Monmouth County, (NJ) Judge Angela White Dalton. Instead, she threw me out of the virtual courtroom and suggested I had gotten access to the courtroom illegally.
I was actually attempting to watch a hearing later that day in a notorious Monmouth County divorce Bryan Alintoff Vs Rachell Alintoff.
It's notorious because it started in 2010 and it still isn't completed; in fact, the way things are going now, it won't be completed any time soon.
The hearing I wanted to attend was to hear an emergency motion filed by Bryan Alintoff to temporarily give him sole custody based on an audio recording I released onto YouTube. The audio is of the Alintoff son, who has autism, suggesting he wants to get a grenade to kill his dad.
Shortly after I emailed Bryan Alintoff on April 22, 2021, his attorney fired off an emergency motion blaming Rachel for releasing it.
Though motions like this normally take up to a month or more to be heard, Judge Dalton scheduled on an emergency basis for Monday morning April 26, 2021.
My confrontation with her earlier in the morning, I was told, was the subject of much of the hearing.
Rachel Alintoff, through her attorney Demetrios Stratis, filed a counter motion to have Judge Dalton dismissed. That motion is below.
The centerpiece of Alintoff's motion to recuse was behavior by Judge Dalton in a hearing on March 12, 2021.
The subject of that hearing was another emergency motion- this one brought by Rachel Alintoff- to temporarily switch custody to her after her son twice threatened to kill his dad.
In fact, the recording I released was also released into the record.
The hearing was noteworthy for repeated bizarre behavior by Judge Dalton. In one instance, Stratis attempted to make a technical argument involving the Americans With Disabilities Act, when Judge Dalton interjected and claimed she wasn't covered by the ADA. That is below.
Judge Dalton never interjected so rudely during any portion of Mr. Alintoff's presentation. Ironically, Judge Dalton ruled she would not interview the son anyway, making the entire argument moot.
Finally, she allowed Bryan Alintoff to speak but Rachel Alintoff; further, after it was clear that Mr. Alintoff was only testifying to speculation and insults, Judge Dalton, rather than ruling on the objection, meandered- opining on whatever appeared to be on her mind at the time- before finally shutting Mr. Alintoff down. That is below.
Judge Dalton also read into the record portions of an investigation- a portion which made Rachel Alintoff look bad- but this investigation is still ongoing and it is not clear what is in the rest of the report as Judge Dalton did not provide either of the parties a copy beforehand.
Rachel Alintoff further told me this according to a recording of Monmouth County NJ DCPP worker Tara McClelland
(r)eveals
that Judge Dalton specifically subpoenaed a copy of Ms. McClelland illegally
interviewing the child without a special needs evaluator in the room since the
child has speech issues associated with his disabilities. On another recording, Ms. McClelland promises
the mother that she will not interview the autistic child without a special
needs support person in the room and then not only a week later, ignored her
promise and interviewed the child at the father’s home. On April 26th motion hearing,
Judge Dalton lied into the record and said that it was DCPP that voluntarily
gave the unfinished report to the court.
It appears that Judge Dalton has been advocating for Bryan Alintoff from
the bench and acting as his own person counsel. Both are ethics violations and grounds for
recusal.
New Jersey DCPP said they could not comment on specific cases but gave me this statement,
Regarding your question about protocol, NJ statute requires that “The child protective investigator shall interview the alleged child victim in person and individually, during the investigation of a report containing any allegation. The child protective investigator shall observe each non-verbal alleged child victim. The child protective investigator shall use sensitivity to avoid further trauma to each alleged child victim.” (N.J.A.C. 3A:10-3.1(a)).
Judge Dalton denied Rachel's request for temporary custody and even ordered her to have more psychological testing. Alintoff called the tests unnecessary saying further, "The doctor’s report from Lenox Hill Hospital
specifically states that no further tests are needed and yet Judge Dalton
continues to dictate contradictory medical opinions from the bench with a
strong emphasis to have Bryan Alintoff involved in the doctor’s appointments.
After my confrontation, Judge Dalton then decided to deny both Rachel's motion have Judge Dalton dismissed and to also deny Bryan's motion for temporary sole custody.
April is Autism Awareness Month but Judge Dalton doesn't seem to be very aware. I also spoke with Michael Chaplin; he said he also has a son who is autistic. His divorce, also in Monmouth, is about as long as the Alintoff. He said when he was in front of Judge Dalton she treated his teenage son like he was three and it appeared to Chaplin that she mistook autism for mental retardation.
UPDATE:
Bryan Alintoff contacted me on May 6, 2021, and said this. I'm not aware of any gag order.
Mr. Volpe,
It has come to my attention that you posted confidential information about my son , a minor on the internet.
Judge Dalton issued a gag order on 4/26/21. You posted your "article" on 4/30/21. You are in violation of a Court Order.
I come in the last hour and below is the entire interview with Lakeville Minnesota Detective Kelli Coughlin and Samantha Rucki which I refer to.
Part 2
Part 3
The case of Melissa Hagemeier and her fourteen year old daughter is spinning out of control.
Hagemeier is the latest in a line of St. Louis County family court cases where alleged sexual molestation has been covered up.
Previously, I received a police report with Melissa's fourteen year old daughter making graphic accusations against her father,
"He fucked me," the fourteen year old said referring to her father. "He literally put his dick inside of me."
Melissa's daughter remains solely in her father's custody and has been since November 2020. She is currently accused of parental alienation.
But while in her father's custody, Melissa's daughter disclosed again, this time to the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department- where Melissa's ex resides {thus, where the alleged crime occurred}.
Since I've broken that story, I've learned that not only does it not appear that Melissa's ex-husband's attorney, Ryan Munro, did not make his client available for an interview, but he has actively interfered in the investigation.
Munro is attempting to depose most everyone involved in the investigation.
"I represent the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office," an email from that office to Munro stated, "and am in receipt of the subpoena for taking deposition of Deputy Weston and Deputy Womack. I will shortly be filing my entry on this matter and motion to quash the deposition."
"He's {Munro}apparently called several times which would influence them," Melissa's lawyer said of Munro's interference with the Sheriff's office as they investigate his client.
Meanwhile, Melissa's daughter begged for help from her guardian ad litem, Molly Murphy. That note is below.
"I hate it here," Melissa's daughter states, "ever since we've been here my mental health has gone down, holding (sic) he's not drunk and wants to rape me."
Shortly after this note was written by Melissa's daughter to Murphy, Murphy did a home visit.
molly did a surprise visit at the house. she talked to me but did give me any kind of information but just told me what i said was unprofessional and childish, i haft to met with craig today i don't know what time. i'm planning on running away and coming home or finding some one that will take me home i have your address and phone number. with dads and nates. but this i my school account and if he finds out im texting you he will take it away.
That email was sent on March 31, 2021. Melissa's daughter was able to communicate, covertly using snapchat, including a short conversation with me. Melissa's daughter asked me if I was going to help her get safe.
Then, Melissa's ex-husband appears to have made a brazen offer. Here is part of another email from Melissa's daughter to her mom,
ma me and {Melissa's ex} just talked, he agreed to stop fighting for custody for me idk about hunter, if I say I wasn't raped then they will let me go back home, they will send out a paper for you to agree to but you haft to accept. He said he will talk to his lawyer some time soon. it was something about the allegations.
That email was also written on March 31.
It appears that Melissa's ex put his scheme to have his daughter recant her allegations to work.
Shortly after that communication, Melissa's daughter had all her communications removed. Melissa did not hear from her daughter after these emails.
Then, on April 21, 2021, there was another hearing. Remarkably, Melissa was barred from her own hearing, something that many at a recent press conference also said is common in St. Louis County.
The press and court observers were also barred. The judge hearing this was Judge Loren Baker. Judge Baker refused to allow me to observe; Malinda Sherwyn, who also attempted to observe, told me she was barred as well.
All reports came from her lawyer and it appears that Mr. Munro has convinced the court the girl has recanted.
(Judge Lorne Baker)
According to a source, Munro claimed that Melissa's daughter had recanted and the judge accepted Munro's argument.
Melissa's daughter remains in her ex-husband's custody.
Murphy and Munro did not respond to messages for comment. Christine Bertelson, who is the public affairs officer for Judge Baker's court, also did not respond to a message for comment.
The latest Livestream is up. We discuss Judge Nicole Zellweger, judicial star chambers, and more. There is an update in David Segui's case. My article is here and here is the update from TMZ.
Dr. Anne Duncan Hively is in her eighties and it doesn't seem like she is slowing down.
She is prodigious in court appointments and as an expert witness in St. Louis County courts, and other courts in Missouri.
Recently, I featured Dr. Hively, as she participated in a scheme to hide sexual molestation by a father against his fourteen year old daughter. In the audio below, Dr. Hively tells the mother of this fourteen year old- this mother has been banned from seeing her daughter since November 2020- that is the mother's response to the court which is causing angst.
"Melissa, you're being quite clear about your anger at the system was hard on her." Dr. Hively said, "What I'm saying is it was hard on her. Your anger at the system."
This mother, Melissa Hagemeier, had custody switched on an emergency basis with the judge, Virginia Lay, claiming Melissa was alienating the father from his daughter.
Since being forced to live with her father, this girl has disclosed ingraphic detail years of molestation by dad, "He fucked me," the fourteen year old said. "He literally put his dick inside of me."
Despite these disclosures- which have been made to the Jefferson County, Mo. {where dad lives} Police Department- Dr. Hively and other appointees on Thomas' case insist the girl live with dad.
She and other court actors have even suggested the long term goal is 50/50 custody.
Dr. Hively, Melissa told me, has recused herself from this case after my audio of her was released.
But her menace of the court extends far beyond this case.
One appeal found an oft repeated complaint,"In her fifth point, Mother claims the trial court erred in following the recommendation of the guardian ad litem because the guardian ad litem and the psychologist, Dr. Ann Duncan–Hively ('Dr.Duncan–Hively'), were biased."
She is currently the defendant in two lawsuits, which also allege bias and other misdeeds.
Here are some of the highlights of this petition, "Defendant {Hively}, during an investigation of an alleged incident of child abuse and neglect
initiated by her client, held herself out as the family therapist' and offered a
parenting assessment to investigating authorities for the State of Missouri relating to Plaintiff, a
person with whom she had no contact. In her efforts to persuade investigative agencies for the State of Missouri, Defendant
attempted to influence the investigative process with false and derogatory information relating to
Plaintiff, even though Defendant had never met Plaintiff and had purportedly received all of her
information from J Frisbee, the individual who hired Defendant for the purpose of prosecuting
a claim of abuse and neglect against Plaintiff. Utilizing Defendant’s purported authority and misrepresentations, an extensive
investigation was launched into Plaintiff’s care of his minor son, B.A., which involved extensive
interviews with Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s friends and family, including, but not limited to, an
unnecessary and invasive medical examination of B.A., who at the time of the investigation was one
year of age."
In another lawsuit, Dr. Hively is accused of making false statements about another individual to the police- statements which led to criminal charges.
After testifying in this man's divorce, Dr. Hively stated, according to the lawsuit, to the Franklin County, Missouri Police that he told her, "It's a good thing you are not Pinocchio or I would have to kill you."
This led to charges, Assault in the 3rd Degree, which were eventually dismissed. Dr. Hively also got a protective order under false pretenses- making the same false claim- according to the lawsuit.
"On or about December 15, 2015, Defendant filed a petition for an Order for Protection in Warren County...against Plaintiff."
Dr. Hively was also featured in an appeal in which she recommended primary custody to a man who is not the child's father.
This is an appeal from the final judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St.
Louis in joined actions seeking dissolution of marriage, a determination of paternity, the
resolution of child custody issues including the custody demands of a third party who was
neither the biological nor adoptive parent of the child, and awards of child support.
The Circuit Court entered its judgment dissolving the marriage of Jason Scott
Bowers and Jessica Layne Bowers on February 3, 2015. Legal File at 166-181. In its
decree the trial court awarded sole legal and physical custody of Mrs. Bowers' six-year old daughter J.B. to Mr. Bowers, who was not the child's biological father and had not
formally adopted her. Id. at 170-74. Mrs. Bowers filed a motion requesting amendment
of the judgment or a new trial on March 3, 2015. Id. at 182-85. The court entered its
amended judgment on May 26, 2015. Id. at 191-94. Mrs. Bowers filed her notice of
appeal from the original and amended judgments on July 6, 2015.
According to the appeal, Dr. Hively went along with this custody arrangement and even admonished for trying to keep biological dad involved.
Steven Andrew Nugent filed a motion alleging that he was J.B.'s biological father
and seeking leave to intervene in the custody proceeding in order to assert his parental
rights....She stated her opinion that removing Mr. Bowers from J.B.'s life would be
devastating to the child and would interfere with her "emotional development and path to
maturity." Id. at 45, 51.
Dr. Duncan-Hively said that J.B. is not bonded to Mr. Nugent: 'He's a figment ...
Steve is the guy that has a really cute kid named [E.N.]' Id. at 32. She stated her opinion
that if Mrs. Bowers had gotten professional advice earlier 'she would not have told the
child in the context of the divorce about the biological father,' which would have avoided 'the conflict that that generated.' Id. at 41. Dr. Duncan-Hively added: 'But it's water
over the dam. It's done.'"
Dr. Hively is also involved in another notorious case which has drawn attention in St. Louis County: the Van Den Bergh case.
Daily Docket News (DDN) has previously covered this case.
Daily Docket News’ investigative team has an explosive update on a case we reported on last month as well as November and December of last year. VanDenBergh vs. VanDenBergh, Case 15SL-DR05021-01 filed in the Saint Louis County Family Court on 10/10/2016. Elaine Pudlowski, Esq., with the law firm of Frankel, Rubin, Klein, Siegel, Payne & Pudlowski, P.C., who was the court appointed guardian ad litem, was fired by Plaintiffs new attorney on November 5, 2020. We previously reported that the Petitioner’s minor child disclosed to a therapist that she was molested by the Respondent, but Pudlowski, with the court’s blessing and having the best interest of something other than the molested minor child in mind, reunified the molested minor child with their molester. Petitioner filed an Emergency Motion for Recusal of Judge Bruce F. Hilton, who was the presiding Judge in this case, and had been allegedly accused of Bias, Prejudice, Harassment, Discrimination, Threats, Intimidation, Denigration and Hostile Acts, to name a few, toward Petitioner. Our legal team reports that Judge Bruce F. Hilton has in fact recused himself on January 12, 2021, with no explanation for his outrageous behavior, in a family court. Why do you think Judge Bruce F. Hilton recused himself? Do you think Judge Bruce F. Hilton and Pudlowski sleep at night knowing that this child is being molested every day on their recommendation? Do you think either Judge Bruce F. Hilton or Pudlowski really cares about what you think? You be the Judge.
I recently broke news that the Guardian ad Litem, Elaine Pudlowski, was colluding with the attorney, Patricia Susi, for the mother in the Van Den Bergh case.
Dr. Hively was also on that case; she was retained as an expert by the father in that case, according to her testimony in a deposition.
In that deposition, Dr. Hively admits to interjecting herself in the case far beyond her authority as father's hired gun. That deposition was taken on August 24, 2017.
Dr. Hively did not act merely as the father's hired gun; she reached out to the Child Abuse/Neglect (CAN) office in the Department of Social Services to try and sway their determination.
"It's a complete report for the task, which was to testify before the Board in Jefferson City, regarding the issue of whether preponderance of the evidence was accurate in the determination of the allegation of sexual abuse," Dr. Hively stated in the deposition.
Though her report stated the sexual molestation allegations made by the daughter, now 10, were not accurate- as with Melissa Hagemeier's daughter- she admitted in another portion of the deposition to never meeting mom or daughter.
"Have you ever spoken to Caroline Van Den Bergh," she was asked by Caroline's attorney.
"No,' Dr. Hively responded.
"And have you ever spoken to {Caroline's daughter}," she was next asked.
"No," Dr. Hively responded.
In a previous story, St. Louis County Guardian ad Litem, Brian Dunlop, was also accused of misleading the court and claiming that a child who also disclosed sexual abuse had only disclosed to her mother; this child had also disclosed to several professionals.
Somehow, she still offered a diagnosis. In another part of the deposition, Dr. Hively claimed that Caroline suffers from multiple mental disorders.
Dr. Hively couches her own diagnosis, by claiming that Caroline had previously been diagnosed with anxiety and clinical depression, but she also acknowledges not specifying to the review board what she was diagnosed with or how Dr. Hively came to this diagnosis.
Dr. Hively also acknowledged in another portion of the deposition to misleading this board about who the girl made the disclosures to. Dr. Hively claimed daughter only disclosed to mom.
As Caroline's attorney quickly pointed out, Caroline's daughter disclosed to numerous people.
"Are you taking into account that {Caroline's daughter} disclosed to the CAC," the lawyer asked. The CAC is the Child Abuse Center, an office within social services.
"I am taking that into account," Dr. Hively responded.
"Are you taking into account that {Caroline's daughter} disclosed to Jean Caine," she was then asked.
"I am taking that into account," Dr. Hively responded.
"And are you taking into account that {Caroline's daughter} described for Barbra Danin that 'daddy does silly things," she was next asked.
"I am taking that into account." She responded. Dr. Hively then backpedaled and called Caroline "the prime source" but this is not what she testified to at the CAN hearing.
"Did you advise the CAN Review Board that {Caroline's daughter} had disclosed to Jean Caine," she was asked.
"No," Dr. Hively responded.
"And did you disclose to the CAN Review Board that she- {Caroline's daughter}- had disclosed to Barbra Danin," Dr. Hively was asked.
"No," Dr. Hively responded.
Despite her dubious record, Dr. Hively appears to be prodigious in court appointments.
Besides her work on child custody cases, she is also called as an expert in certain criminal cases.
"Witnesses for the defense included Defendant, who denied the
allegations of sexual abuse, and Dr. Ann Duncan-Hively, an expert witness and clinical psychologist who had reviewed A.W.�s and S.V.�s CAC interviews." A 2015 appeals court decision notes.
In fact, she fancies herself an expert in rape accusations. She was a featured speaker at a 2019Conference entitled"Child Abuse Allegations: Scientific Fact and Reason Vs. Myth and Emotion."
On her website, she notes.
I am currently licensed as a psychologist in Missouri, previously licensed in New Hampshire and registered in Bermuda. I have been in private psychological practice in St. Louis, Missouri since 1981.
In therapy, I work with adults, couples, families, and children of all ages, struggling with traumas and transitions. The work is focused on what is needed by the client, so that the process is one of facilitation. The treatment model is eclectic, with mutual decision making at the base.
In the forensic setting, I provide assessment and consultation in cases involving adoption, custody and visitation, abuse and neglect, suggestibility of child testimony, sexual harassment and competency. I am also a trained mediator.
In 2010, she provided training for Missouri Guardian ad Litem in a continuing education class called "Psychological Assessments for Custody Conflicts."
Part of the presentation is this portion on parental alienation syndrome, "Unusual Allegations • Parental Alienation “Syndrome” – Not an actual syndrome but present in various amounts in most divorces – Dealing with death of marriage by monsterizing the other parent – Can be subtle or overt – Purpose is to destroy relationship with other parent and 'own' the children."
Melissa Hagemeier has been accused of parental alienation and parental alienation is often used as a defense for abuse allegations, particularly sexual molestation allegations.
Dr. Hively did not respond to an email for comment.
3) https://www.scribd.com/document/405350147/G168-1201-0006 This is David Knutson's order from the Rucki case September 7, 2012. This order is very similar to an order David Segui received on December 28, 2020: parental alienation is the reason, emergency, the use of "in the best interest of the child" to couch bad decisions, and leaning on other "experts" to make decisions. Most of it is in the first couple pages.
5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnUwAkd4NpQ that's a piece on the Rucki case. I want to play the whole thing but it's nine minutes. If that's too long, I'll sample a couple things Paul Reitman said and describe the rest. Play 2:32-5:02 after also pause on 4:19, you'll see a court document which we read. Also 5:42-6:47.
6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dWOAzamubg start at 5 minutes and go to 8 minutes- so three minutes- that's Samantha Baldwin from England, when she mentions parental alienation, she quickly says, "that's what I was accused of." Very similar story to several American stories.
We talked about the Star Chamber created by Judge James Sullivan; find my article here; Megan Fox's article on it is here.
I also mention that Judge David Knutson forced an attorney, Michelle MacDonald, to conduct part of a custody trial, handcuffed to a wheelchair. That video is below and she is wheeled in at approximately 1:10:00
Please note. I welcome any and all comments from any political perspective. I will not stand or approve any swearing, and personal attacks will likely also not be approved.
