I talk about my book "Prosecutors Gone Wild" which you can find here.
Friday, April 16, 2021
Thursday, April 15, 2021
Tuesday, April 13, 2021
Friday, April 9, 2021
Tuesday, April 6, 2021
The Complaints and Lawsuits of Against St. Louis Family Court Institution
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 in graphic 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.
Hi Vely Petition by mikekvolpe
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. Van Den Bergh vs. Van Den Bergh, 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.
"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 clinicalpsychologist 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 2019 Conference 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.
Post Script:
Please check out my previous articles on St. Louis County: Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, and Article 9.
Also check out the crowdfunding campaign which supports this series.
Sunday, April 4, 2021
Judge Judith Wells Conducts conference in Leyva case.
For more on this case check out my article here.
Friday, April 2, 2021
Talking AFCC, Parental Alienation, and this Global Cabal
Notes from the episode below.
) https://theeprovocateur.
2) https://capitalresearch.
3) https://www.scribd.com/
5) https://www.youtube.com/
6) https://www.youtube.com/
7) https://twitter.com/
8) https://pgtpg.github.io/29/
Thursday, April 1, 2021
On Common Law Wise Wordz Podcast
Find a link to the podcast here.
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
Wednesday, March 31, 2021
Tuesday, March 30, 2021
AFCC's Scheme to Keep Ex-MLB Player Away from His Kids
(David Segui from his playing days)
I recently received a short video which shows former Major League Baseball player Mark Grudzielanek shortly after he apparently attacked a minor, not his son according to the video.
"He wants to play, we'll play," Grudzielanek says at the end
"You just sprayed what in his-vinegar- vinegar in his eyes," one youth says of his brother.
It appears the youth initially sprayed Grudzielanek with this vinegar, though not in his eyes but on his back. Grudzielanek, in retaliation, sprayed him six times in his eyes.
This TMZ like altercation is part of a larger scheme to keep another former Major Leaguer, David Segui, away from his two sons: the two in the video.
Segui's story was previously featured twice in Celeb Magazine: Article 1 and Article 2.
All those involved in his custody case were gagged shortly after the first Celeb Magazine article was released; I have been able to piece together what happened using publicly available documents, along with speaking to others close to the case.
Grudzielanek played in the majors from 1995-2010 while Segui played in the MLB from 1990-2004; they were teammates with the Montreal Expos from 1995-1997.
Grudzielanek spoke to me briefly about this incident. That conversation is below.
Don't believe everything you read and hear Grudzielanek told me when I asked him about the video.
But I have uncovered a much deeper web involving several entities I have previously investigated.
Namely it is the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC); Find my article Making Divorce Pay, about AFCC, here.
There are at least fifteen people who are either members of AFCC or have participated in their events who have worked on Segui's divorce from his second wife, Donna.
They are as follows: Raymond Branton {the boy's third therapists}, Kolette Butler {2nd Therapist Interventionist}, Joel Covert {boy's 4th therapist}, Robert DiCarlo {advised mother's lawyer}, Christina Hamilton {father's second attorney}, Carlos Jones {older boy's 2nd therapist}, Mary Ann Lanzilotta {mother's court appointed therapist}, Carol Mellen {father's court appointed therapist}, Kathleen Miholich {did home study}, John Moran {1st therapist interventionist}, Dr. Shanna Sadeh {did trauma assessment for the two minors}, Steven Serrano {did divorce mediation}, Julie Skakoon {boys 1st therapist}, Stephanie Stromfors {current best interest attorney for the minors}, and Diana Vigil {3rd therapist interventionist}.
I reached out to everyone on this list along with Donna and her attorneys. Dicarlo said he didn't comment on cases; Vigil's office said they don't speak to the media and the rest did not respond.
I reached out to David Segui, who said the gag order barred him from comment.
Grudzielanek is not a party to the case, so not bound by a gag order; we didn't discuss the custody case in the interview anyway.
The judge on this case is Brad Astrowsky, who is not a member of AFCC but did attend their annual conference in 2019, according to his disclosures.
AFCC did something which they have perfected; downplay abuse allegations, while dubiously claiming parental alienation, and having many of their members appointed to the case to run up fees.
There was, as shown above, multiple therapists, several more therapist interventionist {separate from a traditional therapist}, several lawyers, a mediation and more featured in this case.
On December 28, 2020, Judge Astrowsky issued an emergency order- which he stated was done in secret and on the recommendation of the BIA Stromfors- changing custody temporarily, granting Donna sole custody and barring David Segui from any contact with his children.
The reason for the emergency was parental alienation.
"Based upon the findings enumerated in the January 16, 2020, Order this is a case of severe parental alienation by the Father against the Mother." Judge Astrowsky states in his order.
Aaron Nash is the communications specialist for the Arizona Judiciary. He could not comment on the case directly but stated in general, "Family court matters are among the most emotionally difficult cases that families face, even under the best circumstances. Custody matters, like other disputes, can result in a situation where a judge has to make a determination based on the evidence and legal arguments presented."
But this decision seems especially bizarre because just in November 2020, Judge Astrowsky ruled there was no parental alienation, after Donna's attorneys filed another motion.
That Stromfors was advising Judge Astrowsky is important because, according to an audio recording I received, Stromfors and Astrowsky have in the past carried on an affair.
"It's well known in the court that Stromfors and Astrowsky have not only worked together but have carried on a personal relationship outside the courtroom," the anonymous person states, "This was going on while he was married. He was very flirtatious with all the women in the courthouse."
To pull off this parental alienation scam, these numerous court appointees have ignored repeated disclosures of abuse by the children.
This incident with Grudzielanek is not the first they have reported against him, along with several disclosures against the mother.
In September 2020, Grudzielanek was accused of threatening his step-children.
1-2 Mark Grudzielanek PR 9-... by mikekvolpe
His own violent history also extends back. CBS reported on an incident from 2000 involving a drunken bar fight.Los Angeles shortstop Mark Grudzielanek faces an assault charge for allegedly punching a bar bouncer earlier this week.
The 29-year-old Grudzielanek, a former All-Star, was in Moose McGillycuddy's on Front Street late Tuesday night when a bouncer asked him to leave, Sgt. Donald Simpson said Thursday.
For some reason, Grudzielanek then allegedly punched the bouncer several times in the face, opening a 2-inch cut over his left eye.
In 2008, he was the subject of a police report for allegedly pushing the mother of his children to the ground.
The trauma assessment done by Dr. Sadeh stated, "In this case, both children reported Mother abused and neglected them throughout their childhood. Dr. Sadeh reported these allegations to the Arizona Department of Child Safety as mandated by state laws and regulations. Dr. Sadeh did not investigate the allegations and did not attempt to determine the truth about what happened. Nothing in this report should be construed as a finding by Dr. Sadeh of abuse or neglect."
A police report stated that on January 28, 2021, one of the boys ran from his mother's house, after she punched him.
"I contacted the male subject in the kitchen and asked him what was going on. He stated he ran away from home after his mom
punched him in the face. I then identified him as $%$% Segui. I asked him what he and his mom were arguing about and he stated they
were arguing about not being able to see his father and how abusive she was to him and his brother." The police report stated. "{The boy} then stated she got mad at
him for saying those things and punched him in the face. {The boy} then went on to say his mother had recent put a court order on his dad
keeping him from being able to see {the boy} and his brother. I asked {the boy} if his mom knew he left the house and he replied she didn`t
because he waited until she went to sleep before he left the house. I asked {the boy} where he lived, and he stated he did not know the
address. I asked him what his moms phone number was, and he again stated he did not know. I advised him we were going to need to
talk with his mother and he stated he understood."
On top of this, deposition testimony suggests that Donna was not a very involved mom.
Thus far, none of this matters. David Segui is considered a parent alienator and for now he must be kept away from his kids entirely.
"It is in both children's best interest to have no 'contact' with Father or other family members, relatives, friends, or other associates of Father and parents of the children's friends who are likely to interfere with the children's progress in effectively repairing their relationship with Mother." Judge Astrowsky's order states.
Judge Astrowsky further ordered that the boys immediately begin reunification therapy with Family Bridges.
Reunification camps are supposed to be a place where children transition from the parent the court deemed to be alienating to the alienated parent, but their effectiveness is dubious; in most cases children are coerced into saying things like that the targeted parent loves them and they only are afraid of that parent because of the things the alienating parent says.
Though the order appointing Family Bridges didn't get signed until December, 28, 2020, a deposit was paid apparently by Donna for Family Bridges days prior to the order being signed; according to a receipt. Unless the judge revealed his decision before publishing it, no one should have known what camp was being chosen before the order was signed.
The investigations included NBC Bay Area, NBC New York, the Center for Investigative Reporting, and NBC in Charleston, South Carolina.
The investigations found that the camp was coercive, often traumatizing to the children, and showed little if any long term effectiveness in fixing the parent child relationship which they claim are broken.
Furthermore, in this case, Diana Vigil was the driving force in recommending Family Bridges. Vigil is the ex-wife of John Moran, who was also on the case.
"Additionally, on December 1, 2020, Diana Vigil, the court appointed therapeutic interventionist, advised the Court of the need for a more intensive therapeutic intervention process: Family Bridges Workshop." Judge Astrowsky's order stated.
Moran is also on the board of Overcoming Barriers, another reunification camp similar to Family Bridges.
Also on the board of Overcoming Barriers, is former Connecticut Judge, Lynda Munro, who presided over Sunny Kelley's case, which had a similar set of facts and twelve AFCC affiliated people. Munro left the bench shortly after the details of Kelley's case came out.
Family Bridges camp proved to be a disaster for Segui's kids; at least if you believe Segui's son, who left a desperate comment on Celeb Magazine. It's below.
They Didn’t listen to a single thing I said Dr. Rand said that I’m a liar and none of the abuse happened and got pissed off any time I brought it up. I went outside and was talking with the Therapeutic Interventionist and I told her how are you going to send me and my brother back to her when she abused us and she told me that I need both parents in my life and I said no she physically and sexually abused me and I’ve been doing perfectly fine with my dad staying out of trouble unlike when I was living with her. She also tells me that my brother needs to have both parents and saying it’s harder for him since he stopped living with her when he was only 8 and maybe he misses her. She blatantly ignores the fact that me and {my brother} were abused by her and want nothing to do with her. Once we walked back in and said were not going through with the Program they had my mom contact multiple wilderness camps for kids with behavioral issues and they were three months long and me and my brother were going to be split up. While all of this was happening he read me the report and it stated that since my dad didn’t coerce us to go back to my mom. Coerce which means persuading an unwilling person to do something by force or threats. I told him so my dad was supposed to send us back with my mom when we don’t feel safe around her and he said yes. Since I didn’t want to be split up from my brother so I just said ok I’ll just bull shit the program and go through with it because I don’t want be separated from my little brother. Once we got home and were living with my mom me and her get into an argument and she punched me in the face. I waited till everything was quiet and ran I heard cop cars so I hid in pushes for a while than knocked on someone’s door and told them what happened. They called the cops and I told them what happened they put me in the cop car so I can give them directions to the place we were staying at. When they interview my mom she lies and said she didn’t hit me the cop comes out said he thinks me and my brother were wrestling a couple of days before that and that’s why I have a bruise on my face. The cop contacted Child Protective Services and told me that my mom will call them to come interview us and they never did and instead the Therapeutic interventionist comes over and has a family meeting. I acted like I was asleep and she tells my brother I’m having a tough time adjusting and that he should stay with me and make sure I’m ok instead of him going to my mom’s sisters house. When I “wake up” I start arguing with her and my aunt who’s saying everything was so amazing what happened and Van heil chirps in saying looked like you guys were so happy and I told her no it was all an act so I don’t get separated from my brother and told her I want to go back to my dad and she told me I can’t. My mom has her friend come upstairs and tell us your mom is leaving at 1:30 for a court hearing and If you don’t have a family meeting with her their going to separate you and your brother for 3 months and the 90 days will restart. So we have the meeting my mom tells me I violated the court order because I ran off and wasn’t in eyesight of an adult. She than asks me and my brother if were going to listen and respect her and we tell her no so she says I need to leave we can finish this later. Like 4 days later I look up family Bridges and start reading about other peoples cases and tell her I looked it up and I don’t trust it’s going to be 90 days all these cases it’s been more and that Dr. Rand said that he makes these changes permanent and she says our case is different you will see your dad in 90 days. We keep arguing with her so she has her fiancee and her friend over and than she says she needs our phones to see what we looked up and we weren’t allowed to search anything up. We haven’t had our phones since. My brother was looking up my dad and came across this. I will probably get in trouble for this but I don’t care anymore I’m not going to be silenced by the court any longer even though this violates the 90 day order and people need to know what goes on in these reunification camps.
Segui remains barred from any contact with these two children.
Post Script
Please check out the crowdfunding which goes along with this article to support more work like this.
Update
Grudzielanek is now under investigation for the incident in the YouTube video at the top: according to a TMZ story.
Saturday, March 27, 2021
GAL, Lawyer, and Judge Collusion in St. Louis Revealed
(Part of text messages between Elaine Pudlowski and Patricia Susi)
A remarkable set of emails and text messages between lawyers and a guardian ad litem in St. Louis County show the extent of the collusion that the players will resort to in managing cases.
I have received text messages and emails between Patricia Susi, Deborah Henry, and Elaine Pudlowski, in which the three are discussing the Van Den Bergh case.
This is a case first broken by Daily Docket News. Here is part of that.
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. Van Den Bergh vs. Van Den Bergh, 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.
Susi represented the mother in this case from September 2017-June 2018; during that period she was in constant contact with Pudlowski, who was the Guardian ad Litem (GAL).
A GAL is brought into custody cases to represent the best interest of the child or children.
They were repeatedly in inappropriate communication. In one instance, they scheme behind the scene to stop mom from having her daughter see a therapist.
I'm not sure in what scenario it would be appropriate for a GAL to have communication with a judge and not involve counsel for each party as well, but in such a scenario, I definitely can't imagine the GAL should then reveal that conversation in a text message.
"Courtroom locked and he is not answering the door buzzer," Pudlowski responded.
(Another text message which suggests inappropriate contact between Pudlowski and judge)
In another exchange, both treat the mother, Caroline, with contempt.
"My frustration is not with you," Pudlowski says to Susi in one email, "I am so sick of Caroline's bullshit."
"I know, just frustrated by the antics that go on in this," Pudlowski says in another text message.
It's noteworthy that the girl in this custody made repeated disclosures of sexual abuse and Pudlowski demanded that the dad see her unsupervised over the objections of several therapists. It's possible all the headaches created by this case was due to the situation she was creating.
Pudlowski took to calling this mom "Crazy Caroline" and she was so inappropriate with the nickname that she mentioned it to Evita Tolu, who is now suing Pudlowski and others. In the audio below, Pudlowski tells her to "get over it" and deal with her ex-husband, the accused molester, having unfettered access to her daughter.
In the most remarkable exchange, Susi files a motion to have Pudlowski removed as a GAL, but while this appears tough outwardly, behind the scenes they are telegraphing to each other.
"Sending you a nasty gram," Pudlowski texts to Susi, presumably shortly after receiving the motion.
Sometime later, Susi sent this text message to Pudlowski.
"Just wanted to let you know that Deb H had nothing to do with the filing on Monday. She wants me to amend and take her name of of the pleading. I just wanted you to know I don't think I can do that without sending a red flag to Caroline," Susi says to Pudlowski.
Deb H is Deb Henry a senior lawyer in the firm where Susi works. Curtis, Heinz, Garrett, and O'Keefe. It appears that Henry was overseeing the case.
In fact, Henry did not want her name placed on the motion to disqualify Pudlowski per emails below.
Email TRail Susi + Henry RE Motion to Disqualify GAL (1) by mikekvolpe on Scribd
"Unfortunately, you are burning a bridge for a client that will turn around and sue you in a hearbeat because she is manipulative, she is a proven liar and she will need someone to blame when she loses custody." Henry says to Susi, of the firm's client. Henry made her own startling admission in another set of emails.
"From my perspective, we have the October 13th TRO and subsequent trial date in November. How wedded are you to the trial dates," Henry emails to Pudlowski on September 18, 2017, "It is important that {the daughter} get evaluated because we are buying future litigation. {emphasis mine}"
Buying future litigation doesn't seem ethical or legal and Ms. Henry seems to have a lot to answer for.
All three ladies do, along with the primary judge on this case, Bruce Hilton. I reached out to all of them unsuccessfully, but my email to the three ladies is below. They may not have found it as amusing as I do.
Ladies,I'm attaching three attachments. Let me blunt, they kind of look bad for all of you. According to the most damning one, Ms. Susi, then representing Ms. Caroline Van Den Bergh, was communicating by text message with Elaine Pudlowski, the GAL on the case. My favorite comes from page 19, "sending you a nasty gram," Elaine says to Ms. Susi, this is timed for the approximate moment that Ms. Susi filed a motion to recuse Ms. Pudlowski. Am I right?You seem to joke a lot about Caroline but her daughter has disclosed numerous times that she's being molested by dad who gets 50% custody. Am I right?The second attachment is also pretty bad. I quote, Ms. Henry to Ms. Pudlowski, "It is important that {Caroline's daughter} get evaluated since we are buying future litigation.""Buying future litigation" could you get me some context here?The third one is the least damning, but Ms. Henry appears to want to distance herself from Ms. Susi's motion to remove Ms. Pudlowski. Am I understanding that or am I missing something? Could this distancing have anything to do with the buying of litigation that is happening? Any other thoughts?
Post Script:
Please check out my previous articles on St. Louis County: Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7, and Article 8.
Also check out the crowdfunding campaign which supports this series.
Thursday, March 25, 2021
Livestream on Angie Freiner Updates
Also, I mentioned in this that the prosecution filed a motion which is below.
Wednesday, March 24, 2021
Trend On: Talking St. Louis County Corruption and More
Also, check out my latest article on St. Louis County affair.
Check out Making Divorce Pay about AFCC here.
On With Ed Martin, Pro America Report
Check out the background articles. Here is the article on Cuomo. Here is more on the illegal immigration issue.
Tuesday, March 23, 2021
Bizarre Hearing Leads to Freiner's Release
(Evita Tolu, representing Freiner, and Judge James Sullivan at a virtual bond hearing March 23, 2021)
Angela Freiner is home, but not before the St. Louis City Courtroom of Judge James Sullivan turned into a circus.
Freiner was recently arrested and held on $75,000 all cash bond for what amounts to sending a mean email to a judge. That email is below.
The court does not have the right to hold my daughter against her will or traffic her across the country! If she is not returned to me today there will be consequences for your conduct. You have stepped over the line for any time of immunity as a judge!
It was the "there will be consequences" which especially caught the ire of its target, Judge Nicole Zellweger.
(Judge Nicole Zellweger)
Zellweger had recently trafficked, if you ask Freiner of course, Freiner's 14 year old daughter; Freiner's daughter had first been moved to a psych ward and then to Arizona it appears even though the girl is on audio telling Judge Zellweger that her father is molesting her. Judge Zellweger saw fit to force to girl to live with him anyway.
Shortly after that recording was made public, Zellweger first tried to have it removed and then when that turned into a much bigger story, she quickly recused herself.
After Freiner then sent her the above email, Zellweger had her arrested and she is now charged with Tampering with a Judicial Officer, a Class D Felony, which is a low level felony.
Freiner was picked up more than two weeks ago. She was scheduled to have hear bail hearing on Monday March 16, 2021, but on the eve of that the entire St. Louis County Judge slate recused itself from her case.
Judge Recusal Order by mikekvolpe
St. Louis County is the 21st Judicial District and Sullivan is in the 22nd. He was quickly chosen by the Missouri Supreme Court and promptly postponed the hearing until March 23, 2021.The hearing was scheduled to start at 9AM Central Time. Instead, everyone was available but Angie, who was in jail.
For approximately forty-five minutes, the judge's staff were contacting the jail while the hearing conducted virtually stalled.
During this time, Judge Sullivan warned repeatedly that unauthorized recording of this virtual conference was not allowed. He said it twice and possibly a third time.
After about fifty minutes, Freiner's attorney, Evita Tolu, waived her appearance and the hearing began without Freiner.
The hearing began but shortly after formalities were read, the judge and both lawyers disappeared into what is called a "breakout room."
The breakout session lasted only fifteen minutes, however the Judge used the breakout room to hide the hearing from the general public.
There were nearly twenty observers on the video conference and all but the lawyers and judge were left out of this breakout room.
I asked Judge Sullivan for an explanation along with calling the court, but they have provided none.
Despite Judge Sullivan's attempts to keep this hearing as non-transparent as possible, I have learned that most of the hearing, including some if not all of the breakout sessions, were recorded. Judge Sullivan referred to the breakout room as akin to his chambers.
During one the prosecutor, Jessica Nagy, asked the judge to remind the audience again that no one was to record them.
"I just want to make it clear that it if these people are going to be on here and present, that it is made clear that they are not allowed to record," Nagy said in what should soon be an ironic statement.
Tolu argued that Freiner had ties to the community, is not a flight risk, and doesn't present a threat.
She was bolstered in her argument by the admission of the prosecutor that Angie has no prior convictions for misdemeanors or felonies.
When Tolu attempted to introduce part of the narrative from Freiner's custody trial, the prosecutor objected, arguing that it was not relevant to the argument made- that she's not a flight risk, is not a danger, and has ties to the community.
Judge Sullivan sustained the objection noting, "The underlying case is not really germane to the court as far as the bond."
But later, the prosecutor noted that her daughter lives out of state and argued that this could make Angie more of a flight risk with her daughter in another state, but Angie's daughter is in another state, Arizona, due to the custody case, the "underlying case" which Judge Sullivan said was not "germane to the court as far as the bond."
Jessica Nagy from LinkedIn
Prosecutor Nagy argued that the victim, Judge Zellweger, remained fearful for her and her family's life.
"I have spoken to the victim who is fearful for her life and the life of her family," Nagy said, "Ever since she has been charged with this victim has also gotten multiple threats from others that have been involved with the case."
The second part of Nagy's statement is interesting and curious; if someone else is threatening the judge, they should be arrested, at least if Nagy also thinks that sending a judge an email and stating "there will be consequences" constitutes harassment.
Nagy continued, "So, now, the victim is being threatened by many others in the community."
I think Ms. Nagy maybe including me in this statement. I have sent Judge Zellweger some emails and while not threatening, I can see how Judge Zellweger may not find them as funny as me.
They did not start out sarcastic. My first one was direct and it was sent to her and the Guardian ad Litem, Venus Jackson, on the case. It included a link to audio of Jackson telling Judge Zellweger of numerous incidents of abuse.
Email below.
It's Mike Volpe. I recently spoke with Ms. Jackson. I'm working on a story about widespread corruption in St. Louis County courts and the case of Angela Freiner was brought to my attention.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vk6zV-EA-E This is the two of you discussing how Angela Freiner's daughter disclosed abuse by her father and people living in his home. Yet, Ms. Jackson recommended and Judge Zellweger obliged forcing the daughter to live with her father and recently her mother, Angela Freiner, spent two days in jail for refusing to force her. Is that right? Ms. Jackson even accused Ms. Freiner of parental alienation, which is a discredited and bogus label. This looks like a Kids for Kash type scheme in which Ms. Jackson ignores abuse so that abuser gets custody and Ms. Jackson is rewarded with more cases. Am I wrong?
They continued to be direct and then shortly after the audio of Zellweger and the 14 year old was released I sent her this email on Monday March 1, 2021.
So, if I understood you correctly on the audio recording, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfKpCS_ y0Bs you thought this decision would end the family's conflicts, https://www.scribd.com/document/496484140/ Freiner-v-Judy-Exhibit-a- Judgment-1-1 You thought that switching custody to an alleged abuser would calm the family. How exactly did you make such an unconventional decision? I am familiar with judges like you. Are you familiar with Judge David Knutson of Dakota County? Check out this order, https://www.scribd.com/document/405350147/G168-1201- 0006 somewhat like yours, only you had a hearing before it. The two oldest daughters ran and were hidden about nine months after this order. The mother was blamed, jailed, smeared in the media. Parental alienation there too. Very similar, no. This seems to be a pattern. What do you think? I don't understand why judges like you constantly presume abuse is parental alienation. Who is telling you this?Do you know Rena Hughes, https://www.ktnv.com/news/contact-13/contact-13- family-court-judge-faces- charges again, parental alienation. It's amazing how many of you judges behave the same way while screaming parental alienation. Can you imagine if you're wrong? If it is abuse. You'd have a lot to answer for. Is that why you are desperate to hide the audio recording? Judge Zellweger, I don't think you should be trying the Freiner case. I don't think you can be objective. I think you should recuse yourself. What do you think?
On Thursday March 4, 2021, Judge Zellweger did indeed recuse herself from the case I suggested she was too biased to continue on.
As I see it, the judge and I had developed a dialogue- even if it is a dysfunctional one. I asked her questions and she responded with some sort of tyrannical judicial act; after I sent her a link to the audio of her ignoring sexual molestation, she quickly called an emergency hearing to have that audio destroyed.
Most recently, someone- presumably at her behest- has asked that YouTube take down two videos recorded of her courtroom, including the one of her forcing a fourteen year old to go to the dad the girl says is molesting her; this complaint was filed on March 22, 2021, and the videos remain up as the article is published.
I felt it only proper to continue the dialogue.
By this time, Judge Zellweger had trafficked Angie's daughter to Arizona, recused herself from the case, and then had her arrested.
If I told her how I really felt, I might say something I'll regret; so, I resorted to humor.
For instance, Nick Reed of KSGF in nearby Jefferson City picked up Zellweger's story in his radio show. Find the link here.
I thought Judge Zellweger would enjoy this podcast; I sent it with this note, "This can't be good for your career."
Then, an independent YouTube channel, Just Conspiracy, developed an interest in the story. I thought Judge Zellweger would enjoy his videos; I sent her the one below, with the caption, "I don't think he likes you."
Then I saw, Just Conspiracy did another video Judge Zellweger should be interested in. Even though Judge Zellweger would definitely enjoy this video, he did put devil horns on her.
So, I added this, "Yep, that Just Conspiracy guy definitely doesn't like you. You know what it is. He put devil horns on your head. If he's putting devil horns on your head, I'd bet he doesn't like you. Sad."
I can see where she wouldn't find it as funny, but it's not harassing, threatening, or any other made up crime they'd like to claim.
Angie joined the virtual hearing about ten minutes prior to it ending. The judge informed her that she'd be released on her own recognizance- meaning with no bond- with certain limited conditions.
"I don't want you to contact directly or indirectly any of the state's endorsed witness or their family members. What I mean by that is I don't want you to even put their names into a computer Google search," Judge Sullivan said. "That means through a third party, through a family member, you are not to contact them."
I hope Judge Sullivan isn't talking to me, because Judge Zellweger and I have a good dialogue going.
Post Script:
Please check out my previous articles on St. Louis County: Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 5, Article 6, and Article 7.
Also check out the crowdfunding campaign which supports this series.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
