Livestream

 

 Topics include Council For Children's Rights, parental alienation, North Carolina, Mecklenburg County, Libby Leonard, Judge Tamara Hall, and Ohio. 

Foster-Morales Off Controversial Case

 

Dori Foster-Morales, the high priced and high powered Miami area family law attorney, has asked to be removed from a controversial case. 

I first discussed the divorce of Gabe Shapiro and his ex-wife Paty Alcanter in the summer. See the interview with Gabe below, starting at about forty minutes in. 

 

 At the time, Shapiro, who along with family members had founded the successful jail electronic payment system called JPay, was barred from seeing his two children at all. 

(Morales, from her law firm website)

Morales had not only successfully argued for sole custody to her client but had even argued that Shapiro pay for her and other fees. 

Since the summer, things have not gone as well for Morales, who according to a court document charges $700 per hour. 

In August, Judge Ivonne Cuesta, who had provided many of Morales' favorable orders, recused herself from the case. 

Now, it appears she is ready to remove herself. 

"I have no objection to mother's counsel withdrawing," stated Anastasia Garcia, who is the guardian ad litem on the case, in a recent correspondence. 

Garcia has had much of her bill paid by Shapiro as well. 

In an unusual move, Garcia hired an attorney, Jacqueline Valdespino, and both their bills have been paid by Shapiro. 

Post Script

Please check out the previous parts of this Miami-Dade series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5. 

"

California Small Business Owner Says State Family Courts Don't Care About Children

(California Judge Tamara Hall)

A California man said his family court story- now in its eighth year- has taught him not to trust even his own lawyers. 

"They {the system} don't care about your kids." Sardi said. 

Find the full interview below.

 

 Sardi said he even paid for a private judge- on the advice of one of his attorneys- and this was supposed to speed up the process. Instead, the private judge took years to rule. 

Sardi said the entire experience has been a struggle to be heard, to have his son heard, and to be provided civil rights and due process.

He said that it was his ex-wife who committed acts of domestic violence, but the courts quickly covered it up. 

"Due to my ex-wife's frustration in giving orders and directions to my son- it was frustrating- so she ran her fingernails down the front of his face twice," Sardi said then described another incident, "She got frustrated with him and grabbed the nipple on his chest when I wasn't present. That's assault there."

Sardi said a totally different picture was painted in court, "Once we get into the courts, all that's forgotten. The wife is the victim. Not the child, and nothing is ever brought up about this incident}, and there was other abuse too. All this is  just pushed aside, never mentioned again by the court, and I am the perpetrator- the person causing all the mayhem in the family, and, and this is what goes on because they need to keep the trial going and the billing running."

Sardi said that not only was a false narrative of him being the problem painted but the case moved through the California courts painfully slowly. 

He said he filed for divorce in January 2014, but the couple did not split assets until June 2016. Meanwhile, a final ruling on custody until January of 2017.

"That's a lot of money spent on legal fees and jockeying around." Sardi said.

Sardi said one attorney recommended to go to a private judge in a private court to speed up the process. 

A California law firm described what a private judge is.

Private court is a euphemism commonly used to describe the practice of hiring private judges to rule over a California court case. A private judge in California acts very much like a public judge and will rule over property and asset division, custody, and support issues.

There are a few distinct differences between public and private courts.

Private judges in California have received some attention recently because Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have been using one. 

The private judge they were using was recently disqualified after failing to disclose some business relationships he had with Brad Pitt's attorneys. 

In Sardi's case, he said rather than streamlining the process, the private court only made things even more complicated. 

He said rulings by the private judge stopped him from seeing his son at all, even though everyone was still living in the same home. 

"I can't be in his room at nighttime," Sardi said, "I don't know where all this comes from. All of a sudden, everything is turning around against me."

Sardi said he advises people to stay away from private judges. 

Sardi said his case eventually moved out of private judges and into the courtroom of Judge Tamara Hall. 

Sardi described Judge Hall's rulings as arbitrary and capricious. 

So, while she technically restored him to 50/50 custody, Sardi said the stipulations of her orders set him up to fail. 

One paragraph in particular seems to have been put into the order to be weaponized against Sardi. 

One of Judge Hall's orders is below. 

1716633720 by mikekvolpe

Here is the pertinent portion, "Both parents are ordered to take {their son} to all of his tutoring classes, counseling sessions (with Ms. Rogers) and Physical educational during their respective custodial time. Failure to comply with result in Mother having primary care Monday through Friday and father having alternate weekends, Friday at 8pm — Sunday at 8pm."

That order, as it is written, means that if either parent violates this part of the order, Bill Sardi would be relegated to reduced custody time. 

After Judge Hall left the case, Sardi was left to face Judge Rolf Treu.

Judge Treu, Sardi said, handed out draconian punishment for minor violations. 

For instance, when, on one occasion, Sardi did not finish all his son's homework assignments, this was used to significantly reduce custody. Judge Treu's order is below. 

Minute Order 3.15.18 (1) by mikekvolpe on Scribd

Sardi then represented himself to try and overturn Treu's order. 

He said he eventually first lost all contact with his son. 

"I received a no contact order after I returned him two hours late." Sardi said. 

He said he found California law which allows children to be heard in front of a judge if they are 14 and older. 

"I filed what's called a 3042 application; it's a demand for my son to be heard before the judge, about what he wanted, which was both a father and a mother for significant time."

Finally, in January 2021, another judge, Judge Christine Byrd, restored Sardi's custody time back to 50/50, but he said the damage had been done. 

He said his son refused to be homeschooled when Sardi was barred from seeing him and has fallen behind. 

Sardi said a judge even acknowledged that the court was "taking a risk" with the court order- barring Sardi from contact- and that "he {Sardi's son} could rebel against the court order."

Sardi said he has several pieces of advice for people going through the same thing. Sardi said don't pay attorneys up front, don't trust private judges.

One of Sardi's attorney, Matthew Miller, provided this statement. 

In general, and not specifically responsive to your inquiry about a particular individual, an attorney is bound by the ethical responsibilities outlined in the California Rules of Professional Conduct, and owe to each client a duty of loyalty and a duty of confidentiality. These duties define an attorney and their professional reputation; if an attorney were to violate those duties, in any way, and/or engage in actions that are contrary to their own client's interests (i.e. "work against" a client), from a legal standpoint, they would subject themselves to professional discipline from the California State Bar, and/or could subject themselves to disbarment. Neither myself personally, nor any attorney from our office have ever, nor would they ever engage in the types of behaviors that you have alleged in your correspondence. To take action or engage in any course of conduct that is contrary to a client's interests, in addition to being unethical, would be tantamount to professional suicide. While this office cannot respond further to your inquiry about any specific individual, certainly not without a signed written waiver authorizing that communication (as to do so would potentially violate the duty of loyalty and confidentiality referenced above), if you are truly interested in the objective facts alleged in any dissolution of marriage action, as well as the manner in which those facts were argued in court documents, as opposed to an individual's perception and/or their recollection thereof, you should take a look at the publically accessible court file.  

"I would tell anybody going through divorce today, this is a criminal enterprise," Sardi said. 

Post Script: 

Check out the fundraiser which goes along with this article. 

Check Me Out on Surviving the Intimate

Topics include Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, Samantha Baldwin, domestic violence, Miami-Dade, first amendment. 

Livestream

 

 Topics include Marty Gottesfeld, FCI Terre Haute, Indiana CMU, Kristen Rash, Tamara Molde, Regions Healthcare, Minnesota, Davie County, Wilkes County

Schulz and Yankee's Divorce Makes Little Mention of Blackhall Studios

 

Today, both Claire Yankee and Martin James Schulz are claiming they are the mastermind behind the creation and growth of Blackhall Studio, but when they divorced, Blackhall Studio was barely mentioned. 

Blackhall Studio was sold to a private equity fund for $120 million.

Both Yankee and Schulz have sued the Founder of Blackhall Studio, Ryan Millsap, claiming they are owed most of the proceeds of the sale. 

Schulz has been involved in ongoing litigation with Millsap, even though his claim stems entirely from a purported verbal contract which he claims was hammered out in a coffee shop. 

That has not stopped his attorney in this suit, Eric Taylor of Hunton, Andrews, Kurth LLP, from blaming Millsap for all the problems. 

Millsap Timeline by mikekvolpe

That lawsuit recently went to arbitration and a final decision is expected soon. 

Meanwhile, Yankee filed a suit of her own in September 2021, stating in part, "Unbeknownst to Ms. Yankee, Mr. Millsap and Mr. Schulz entered into a business agreement in December 2015 with the intention of stealing Ms. Yankee's business concepts and excluding her from potential profits."

But when Yankee and Schulz- who were married from 2011-2017- got divorced, Blackhall Studio was listed as another potential asset. 

In one document, there was no value or ownership percentage listed. 

Meanwhile, both Yankee and Schulz, showed themselves making very modest income, considering they now claim to stake significant claim to Blackhall Studio. 

(Claire Yankee's income declaration)

(Martin James Schulz income declaration)

Yankee, in particular, seemed unaware of any of the business dealings of Blackhall Studios.

In interrogatories, Yankee was constantly asking for documents related to Blackhall Studio of Schulz, and often Schulz would say he is not in possession of said documents. Below are some of the interrogatories. 

 

In the final agreement, neither party claimed any specific interest but rather both agreed each could continue to try and get any claim either  believes they deserve. 

Only now are both claiming to be the mastermind behind the operation. 

I reached out to Schulz and the attorneys for Yankee and Schulz in their suits against Millsap but received no response. 

Post Script

Check out Part one, Part two, Part three, and Part four of this series. 

 

Livestream

 

 Topics include Brenda Bryant, Judge Edward Miller, guardianship, Babcock Center, Cynthia Buckley, Judge David Knutson, Judge Tim Wermager, parental alienation, Judge Donna Scott Davenport, and Mooresville Police Department. 

New Livestream

 

 Topics include: Burkhart V Adkins, Judge Gary Henderson, Davidson County, Council on Children's Rights, John Bryan, and Wendy Smith. 

Anastasia Garcia Doesn't Like that Pesky Hearsay Rule

 Anastasia Garcia, the Guardian Ad Litem for Gabe Shapiro, believes that hearsay should not apply to people in her profession. She even proposed the idea in a lawyer's journal. 

Unshackling Guardians Ad Li... by mikekvolpe

"Commentators courts, and state legislators have reached an almost universal consensus recognizing the pivotal role played by Guardian ad Litem (GALs) in the administration of justice by protecting the vulnerable," Garcia begins in an essay from 2016.

Garcia, in the essay recognized the role of the hearsay rule but believed that GALs are so critical they should be exempt. 

"The interests served by the hearsay rule, ensuring that inherently unreliable statements do not come into evidence, is critically important. However, this needs to be weighed against the necessity of the Guardian to bring to light for the Court, details of an investigation from collateral sources who are (sic) available to testify. This factor has been considered by some Courts."

She continues, "Moreover, in balancing these competing interests the fact that family cases are always heard by a Judge militates heavily in favor of admitting the GAL reports."

These GAL reports, produced by people like Garcia, are often a collection of interviews by people close to both the mother and father. 

Often times, those interviewed for these reports have complained that their interviews were mischaracterized or otherwise twisted. 

Chris Mackney is the subject of my book "Bullied to Death: Chris Mackney's Kafkaesque Divorce."

In that case, the custody evaluator, Stanton Samenow, who took on a similar role to a GAL claimed Mackney had no friends despite interviewing at least three of Mackney's friends. Mackney was in his 40s at time, and these friends, including Rich Ware, had been his friends since college. 

But Garcia, like many court actors, has the full faith and confidence in the court. 

"During a non-jury trial, it is presumed that the court is able to sift the wheat from the chaff and select only the legal evidence." Garcia quotes from a court decision. 

Indeed, Garcia, like this decision, believe that the reason for the hearsay rule is to protect the simpletons who normally make up a jury. Since judges, who Garcia thinks are much smarter than juries, preside over custody issues, they will be able to spot the good hearsay from the bad. 

She continues, "There is a way to address concerns about admitting potentially 'unreliable' statements through Guardian reports. As the current GAL statute requires the filing of a Guardian report 20 days before a final hearing if the time required for the filing of a report is extended to lets say 60 days, any lingering concerns about unreliable statements unduly influencing the court's decision-making process can be conclusively laid to rest."

In other words, give the lawyers enough times and they can re-interview every witness and make sure to challenge all the unreliable statements. Except, this means the lawyers are spending all their time figuring out if the GAL report has improper hearsay statements, rather than making sure to prepare for the case. 

Ms. Garcia and I have wildly differing philosophies on GALs; I think GALs should be eliminated, while she thinks they should be given even more power. 

Please find the interview with Gabe Shapiro below. Starts at approximately 38 minutes. 

Post Script

Please check out the previous parts of this Miami-Dade series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5.

Child on Brink of Living With Alleged Child Molester in Missouri

 

Melissa Hagemeier is facing an impossible choice. 

I've featured Hagemeier's story several times before. She lost custody of her twins- she has other children- in November 2020, after a Guardian ad litem- Molly Murphy- accused her of parental alienation. 

In the TRO, it states, "The Guardian ad Litem and the Court finds that the children will suffer immediate and  irreparable harm as set forth in the Application in the absence of the Temporary Restraining Order."

Upon being forced to live with her father, Hagemeier's daughter disclosed that her father had been molesting her. 

"He fucked me," the fourteen year old said referring to her father. "He literally put his dick inside of me."

"She then stated that she then lost her virginity but at least he wore a condom," the girl states in this portion, "{The girl} stated that she recalled that her night gown was pulled up and her underwear was pulled down. She disclosed that she had been laying on her back and her father crawled on top of her. {Her father} struck her in the left side of her face with his fist causing her to get dizzy. He then pushed her legs up pinning them against her chest when he put his penis into her vagina."

The Jefferson County- where dad lives- Sheriff's Office began investigating the claims, but that's when dad's attorney, Ryan Munro, and the GAL, Molly Murphy, sprung into action. 

Munro and Murphy schemed and forced this girl to sit for a deposition, which often last for hours and force those being question to answer nearly every question asked. 

At this deposition, Hagemeier told me, her daughter recanted the disclosures. 

"They did depo my daughter who recanted, which clearly was setup. We knew she would recant based off the email my daughter sent back in March after a conversation with her father."

In that March conversation, Hagemeier told me, her daughter said her father told her if she recanted she would go back to living with her mom. 

According to a recording, Hagemeier was despondent in her father's care. 

 

 In the recording, the girl is heard saying, "I just want to go home."

Now, the system is setting up to force this girl to spend half her time with the man she said molested her. 

According to a proposed consent order, Melissa and her ex will share 50/50 custody. 

Munro and Murphy did not response to messages for comment. 

Hagemeier is currently being represented by Julia O'Connor; shockingly, Hagemeier told me that O'Connor has been threatening for Hagemeier to accept this deal or O'Connor is threatening to withdraw. 

O'Connor did respond by text, telling me my facts were wrong. 

"I can't discuss any active cases with you, Mike. But can say that do not appreciate the name calling from someone who has wildly inactive facts." (This was in response to a voicemail where I said she would not be hired to be a dog catcher, after this is over)

"Mulvaney {she misunderstood my last name} sounds Irish. I don't know what county (sic) your people are from. But I do know they're disappointed in you. And your 'investigative journalistic' skills. Because leaving slanderous and aggressive messages from a conversation that's one sided instead of asking questions is a pathetic example of an 'investigator'. Such a shame."

(I was born in Russia, for the record)

This 50/50 arrangement was telegraphed. According to a recording from the Spring 2021, Murphy was planning this all along. 

 

 "Our ultimate goal is I would think- mine has been- is for the kids to share equal time and be happy, healthy, mentally healthy, okay in school. All that kind of stuff," Murphy states.

Post Script:

Find the previous articles in this series here:  Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, Article 9, Article 10, Article 11, and Article 12,