AUSSIERULES Trial Report - AZ

[aussierules]

My attorneys both do trial work out of Yavapai County as does my FTC. Clearly I have had the mother of all experiences these last 18 months and if I can be of help send me a PM and I will be more than happy to contact you offline and perhaps give you the benefit of my nasty run in with the domestic relations courts of the Great State of Arizona.

[nosonew]

I am sooo intrigued...I hope the judge was thoroughly convinced she is a lunatic (along with her mother and friend)...

[nosonew]

I have been up since 3:45 am...worked all day til 6pm tonight (dialysis nurse)...sat down approx 1 hour total all day, including my 15 minute lunch, couldn't wait to get home to hear...the ONLY THING that will get my mind off of my ACHING feet is this story....HELP AUSSIE (lol)...thanks....

[aussierules]

We break for lunch. My counsel puts me on the stand and proceeds to walk me through all of the allegations made against me. I am asked if I have ever done anything to my child for the purposes of sexual gratification. I respond that I have not done so at any point in the past, present and do not expect to in the future. I repeat that I love my child in a healthy way – I add healthy to my answer these days to prevent these people from thinking it is the wrong kind of love. We review the issue of the tape and I explain my position on why I brought it up the way that I did and why I did not want our child to have to tell her mother about it. Mum is a very stressful person who will jump on anything. Our child is strong and what her mother feels about her matters to her a lot. I did not want to add another brick to my child's metaphorical backpack. She only had one accident and I wanted her to see that it was no big deal. If mum had gotten a hold of it then it would have turned into exactly what it did turn into a major crisis. How would that impact my child's self esteem? Well as we know now mum taped the phone call and managed somehow to turn it into an accusation of uraphilia six months later as well as me trying to have my child keep secrets from mum.

I address the issue of the new accusation of excessive masturbation which I have just heard today for the first time. I tell counsel that I understand socially acceptable behaviors and that doing the things described by mum, her best friend and grandma are not appropriate especially in front of children. He asks why and I tell him that these people are likely saying this because they believe it will help the case of this person that they love and more importantly hurt my case. I do acknowledge that I masturbate but in the privacy of my own home and when I am alone. A couple of years ago that would have embarrassed me to admit this in front of open court but I have changed since April 2003 and the thought of having to deal with these types of issues in front of large crows no longer presents me with any trepidation. That is kind of sad really when you think about it.

My counsel asks me what I want for custody moving forward. I again restate my long held belief that our child needs both her mum and dad. I assert that due to the problems mum has been diagnosed with that I am seeking primary residential care of our child and at least initially until mum can get into therapy and make progress on her anger towards me that she have supervised access only. As you will see when I get around to reviewing mum's testimony and her associated psychological evaluation mum's actions against me are clearly having a negative effect on our child. One only has to look at all the so called forensic contacts with my daughter and medical exams to see that this is true. I know first hand that supervised access is difficult. However the State of AZ had no problem doing it to me for 87 days when they were investigating me for uraphilia. They said that there was NO impact to the child. All of a sudden there is. Seems to me like another double standard at play. The only difference is that once again I have a penis.
Direct lasts about 15 minutes and up walks opposing counsel. He tells the judge he always has problems with me in depositions or testimony and asks the judge to direct me to answer him appropriately. The judge turns to me and asks me if I understand what counsel is asking for and I tell him that I do and I will comply as I always do. Off we go. Back we go to the tape again for the thousandth time. He asks why I would talk to my daughter about urinating and why I made a joke of it. We go through my explanation of the tape again. I am sure that this is just to try and make me look bad in front of this new judge. I hold my ground declining to answer yes/no questions that deserve something more by answering with an unexpected response forcing him to allow me to clarify my position.

Counsel accuses me of being so smart that I have managed to fool the now 20+ tests including the PPG that I have been subjected to. Sure I have a high IQ – 162 I think but that does not mean I violated the protocols. In fact each PhD that came to the stand confirmed that all tests I had taken were valid for interpretation. Counsel then waves a set of child's underwear at me while he asks me if I dress my child inappropriately. I repeat that I only buy clothes that are age appropriate and that I have never dressed my daughter like a stripper despite his assertion to the contrary. Personally I know of no 5 year old strippers. I make a comment about the underwear in his hand before the judge can stop us going at each other and confirm that these were actually a gift to my daughter for her fifth birthday from a friend. He immediately puts them down and tells the judge that he does not plan to put them into evidence. I tell counsel that if as his client alleges I dress my child inappropriately then why has she never been sent home from one of the church schools she has attended?

Her counsel says that while I did not see my child for 87 days it was not really 87 days and that it was really my choice not to see her. I elaborate and explain that normal contact was impacted for 87 days. Yes I did see her 2 times with a CPS Aide (Female) and 6 with a Catholic Social Services Supervisor (Male). I elected not to continue the supervision because it was upsetting to our child because the male was a smoker and she did not like him being so close to her. I did ask for CPS to assign an alternate but they never did. Counsel's argument is ludicrous as always. Of course I want to see my child but I put her need to not be near the male supervisor above my own to see her.

Counsel then tries a new angle. He accuses me of bullying people. I concur that I have I become somewhat vigilant and guarded these last 18 months but who would not with all that I have been through. It is tough to know who to trust and what to be concerned about so the easiest way is to keep your guard up all the time and suspect things that just do not feel right. I admit that I did file a complaint against mum's therapist with his governing board because he told my daughter that it was ok for her to be in bed with mum's new husband but not her own father. This is despite the fact that there was an order from the judge on the case NOT to sleep in the bed with the child. I admit that I did elect to remove our child from the pediatrician who provided her care up to the second accusation because she allowed herself to be part of that referral and refused to provide the records that I am entitled to receive under the federal guidelines. I also admit to filing a complaint against her attorney friend with the AZBAR because she may have made a call to my medical insurer and attempted to get access to my medical records. Her counsel attempts to admit the last of these into our case to try and obscure the view of our case. The judge says that he is not interested and sustains the objection from my counsel. Her counsel then tries to get in a settlement agreement for co-owned assets that is in another case in front of another judge as he claims I used it to coerce mum into accepting my position on parenting back in April 2002 when the document was produced. Again, the judge declines to allow it in and sustains my attorney's objection.

We are forced to stop as the child's therapist arrives and she needs to get back to her patients so I get off the stand. I will be recalled after her testimony so cross can continue.

[nosonew]

Can't wait to hear the outcome!!!!

[aussierules]

I am finishing up typing it in as we speak. Thanks for being so patient. It is worth the wait.

[ocean]

I really hope there is a good ending in this....type faster! :)

[aussierules]

I do not want to give it away but the last part is long so hang in there. I promise it will shock you but probably not surprise you.

[chipmunk226]

Yeah...this is worse then when you favorite show leaves the season off on a cliffhanger and you can't wait to see what happens!  Can we have a hint?!?!  A  teaser maybe?  ;c)  

~EvaCollette

[aussierules]

Child's therapist with a Masters in Counseling gets on the stand. She has never been very friendly to me. She has always had trouble knowing the limitations of her practice and also is unwilling to defer to the experts in this case. She has steadfastly refused to opine on whether any sexual abuse occurred at my hands or not.

As she was called by mum she has direct. Her counsel asks her who brings the child to see her. She states that more often that not it is mum. This is as I have said before because mum tries to use these people as a hammer to beat me with. Counsel asks whether mum follows all of her advice for the child. She says yes. He asks the same thing of me and she responds yes also. This is a surprise to counsel as she does not go down this road any further. He had no doubt been told she would say something different. He asks her if she has seen the report from the psychologist on both of us. He asks if she has experience with people suffering from BPD. She says yes and then gives an opinion as to whether it presents a danger to my child to be with her. She says that she did not think so. She has NO experience working with adults with BPD. This is completely contrary to the PhD who has 15+ years working with BPD and was the court appointed evaluator. I was a little annoyed & perhaps a little disappointed because she had no business responding. She should have said that she had no opinion but you cannot stop her asserting her views. She did report out on the therapy she has been providing to our child and she stated that she was done with the exception of maybe 1-2 more months which meant 1-2 more visits. She said that she thought her role was just checking in now to see that our child was coping ok. Counsel asks her if she thinks that a change to custody would affect our child especially the supervised stuff I was asking for. She states that a significant change might hurt our child as she has close attachment to both of her parents. This was what I had expected given her well known bias against me. Counsel asks her if she thinks that my discussing the peeing accident with my child is strange or cause for concern. She says that she has heard the tape and that she can see a context for the discussion which would not give her concern. That again was not what he wanted so he ends his questioning.

On cross my counsel asked her about relocation of our child. She changed her statement slightly and clarified it saying that the move away would only be viable for my daughter if both parents gave approval to it. Without that she said it could be devastating to our child and she would not support it. That was very useful for my objection to relocation which mum has been pushing since she lost out on the sole custody she sought at the original custody evaluation in July 2003. The therapist goes on to say that I have a "quirky" sense of humor but that does not make me a pedophile. This is consistent with the custody evaluator comments that I am somewhat idiosyncratic but that in no way implies criminal behavior of any sort.

The GAL gets up and asks a couple of questions about parenting styles which are clearly directed at me because she likes me even less than the therapist does. She asks the therapist if she knows that I have moved to stop therapy for our child. Not a big shocker there given that the therapist just said that she was about done anyways. I did so through counsel because I concur with the court appointed psychologist who said that we need to figure out if our child even needs therapy as unnecessary therapy can be very harmful for the child. However as always this GAL likes to make a mountain of any mole hill. Any time this woman opens her mouth she makes acerbic comments about me. It is sad that she cannot act in our child's interest as she is supposed to. She is asked whether she might recommend a psychological evaluation and if so by whom. The therapist recommends a local PhD who I come to find out later is another CPS parasite. We will obviously contest that appointment if it occurs. I concur with the psychological evaluator in as much as the person who should do this if one is done needs to be (a) most qualified and (b) most aware of all the players and situational factors in our case. This recommendation will NOT be in that position.

No redirect from mum's counsel so she leaves.

I get back on the stand. Mum's counsel goes back to the tape of a single conversation I had with my child regarding her accident. He states that this is a new explanation that he has not heard before. I tell him it is entirely consistent with what I told the previous judge assigned to our case and that he needs to back and review his notes or my testimony. I tell counsel that if I had heard something that concerned me in October 2002 I would not have waited until April 2003 to file a complaint especially given its heinous nature. I assert that I find the complaint even more incredible given that 5 days before the first complaint she told our daughter's doctor that she suspected no abuse had occurring. He goes on to ask me about the October 2003 incident and the supposed scratch on my daughter's vagina. I tell him that was not captured in the report of the doctor so I do not know what he is talking about. I remind him that this was not what caused the CPS referral. It was his client's handwritten note to the doctor accusing me of touching my daughter's vagina in an empty tub. Her counsel interrupts me several times and is told not to do so by the judge. My counsel objects to the inclusion of certain marginal evidence that is not related to this case and he gets upset and asks to preserve his objection on the record.

The GAL gets up and asks me if I would change the way I handled the phone call. I said that I have had a lot of time to think about it. I indicate that had I known my effort to calm my child could be so distorted that I would definitely present it differently but that is easy to say with the benefit of hindsight. I state that I would still attempt to deliver the same message that it was ok and no big deal that she should not worry mum about it because it was an isolated incident but that I might use different words. When I said not to tell mum I did not mean it to hide pedophilic behavior I meant it to prevent this kind of crap from happening so I guess in retrospect it blew up in my face. The GAL asks me about the custodial change I want and I repeat my position that I want my daughter to have a good relationship with her mum but that means it needs to be healthy. I state that with the problems that mum has it is not healthy as all of the child abuse allegations demonstrate. I conclude that all of the anal & vaginal exams are not in my child's best interests. I say I do not believe that it will be the way things are forever but I think that it needs to be that way now to protect my daughter.

No more questions so I am done. We take a break because the next witness is the court appointed psychologist. He dials in and the phone is on the judge's desk. Good news really because he can hear it well although the other people in the court cannot. My counsel asks the doctor about his findings from the report. He confirms that essentially I have a clean bill of health – no antisocial behaviors, maladaptive personality traits or behaviors and no severe mental illness. He goes on to talk about mum and he says that she has several personality disorders (BPD, Narcissistic & Histrionic) and a marked preoccupation with sex. He thinks that some of this is tied to her pituitary problems in 1995 but he does not think that is the sole reason for the problems she is experiencing. Meanwhile mum is crying her eyes out. He emphasizes to the court that without some strong action on the part of the judge that mum's behavior will continue and there will be more accusations against me. He states to the court that mum's behavior is predicated on revenge, her testimony has been inconsistent and that she is trying to alienate our child from me. I have posted some of the quotes he made in the other thread I have going but I am putting them here also. I have had to change names to mum, dad, child etc. but the rest of the quotes are pulled straight from the report itself.

•   "During this evaluation mum made several inconsistent statements that lead me to question her motivation for some of the allegations she has made."
•   "Given that the allegations currently before the court are not likely to stop without some type of consequence and intense treatment,"
•   "She has given contradictory statements regarding records, problems she has encountered during the custody battle, and of interest, she maintains that dad has the problem "letting her go" when treatment records indicate otherwise."
•   "Of importance, behavioral and emotional difficulties appear to have existed prior to her pituitary gland operations and cannot be accounted for solely by that operation."
•   "The allegations are no doubt having a profound impact on her daughter and mum does not appear to be sensitive to this."
•   "Mum has indicated that she is suffering from post-operative memory problems."
•   "Her test data and her history suggest traits consistent with narcissistic, histrionic, and borderline personality disorders."
•   "I recommend that mum seek guidance from her physician regarding what seems to be a hyperactive sex drive. This appears to affect her thinking and may at some level be considered a preoccupation."
•   "The escalation of accusations from uraphilia through stalking and harassment suggest a relentless approach at revenge."
•   "These characteristics are obviously maladaptive."
•   "On the contrary, the collateral information, the test data, and my observations suggest that she may be reacting from some intense anger and hate and that these actions are vindictive in nature and likely have some self-serving goal behind them."
•   "There are also records to indicate that mum may be attempting to alienate the child from her father and may have plans to move out of the State."

Mum's counsel gets up and he tries to punch some holes in the report. He asks if the doctor knew about the allegations of uraphilia. Doctor states that he does know and that the tape that was provided by mum was not enough to support the allegation. He states that he concurs with the other professionals who have reviewed all of the material. Mum's counsel then asks if the doctor has children to which he replies no. I am not sure of the relevance but I guess mum's attorney is trying to make the point that he does not have children so he cannot appreciate the alleged risk that my child is facing at my hand. It is a lame argument but I suppose when you have nothing you throw out what you have. He asks the doctor if I could have compromised the tests by cheating. This was similar to the theme that he had followed earlier with the psychosexual evaluator that I went and saw. He states that mum's regular counselor an MSW would disagree with these findings and had he known we were going to do this trial in one day he would have put him on his witness list. Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda. Mum is still balling her eyes out. Mum's counsel then asks why he wrote a letter to address some of the things that the GAL and the child's therapist had said that he took issue with like the move away. Counsel tries to get that letter removed from the record as this doctor was only asked to the psychological evaluations but the judge says that he will lend it whatever weight he chooses.

The GAL gets up and asks questions about me of course. The doctor says while I am no angel – I do have some irritating traits that I am not the problem here. She asks him if he knows that I asked to stop my daughter's therapy. Of course that is not what she wants to hear either. She asks him another hypothetical on the peeing thing which just pisses me off even more. She requests his opinion on supervised visitation as she tells him that I have asked the court to change what is in effect. He says that at times supervised visitation can be more damaging to the child. Again I would argue that it does not even compare to the damage caused by the number of false allegations and associated exams that my child has been subjected to up till now.

My counsel asks a couple of clarifying questions on redirect and then the witness is excused.

Last but not least mum's counsel puts her on the stand. She gets up there and glares at me for about 10 seconds and then he begins. He asks her about how I dress the child. She replies "like a slut". He asks if she is still concerned about her daughter's safety and she assures him that she is. She recalls the supposed excessive "water sports" I did with her when were together as a couple. This had allegedly occurred back in 1991 or so but this woman has a self confessed problem with short & long term memory which she ties to her operation back in 1995. She states that she thinks we need to keep the therapist and GAL because they can help protect her daughter. She starts sobbing. I feel sick to the bottom of my stomach. It was so contrived it was not funny. He then goes on to relocation and asks her what she wants to do. She explains she would like to relocate to MI to be close to her family. She says that our child loves it there. She states that this is not a ploy to get rid of me from my little girl's life contrary to what the psychological evaluator determined. He asks her what she thinks of his report and she simply stated "he got it wrong". I guess that is the disease that borderlines suffer from. They do not know they are sick. He then asks her what she is worried about and she says and I quote "I am worried that he is going to FUCK my daughter before she is 14 – that is why he is dressing her up like a stripper. He always liked teenagers you know." Those words will likely stick in my gut for a long time. The judge peered over his glasses when she said it. I just kept my eyes on the judge and did not look at her. I tried not to show any emotion.

My attorney gets up and asks her if she has any background in child psychology. She says no. He asks her why she made so many allegations to CPS and Law Enforcement. She says that she only made the first one which is strictly true as she had mandated reporters do the others for her. She is smart like that. He asked a bunch more questions and did a pretty good job impeaching her but after the comment she made on direct I got a little hazy. We had been going 10 hours at this point.

The GAL gets up and asks her a couple of questions that were not bad. She asks her if the court allowed her to go to MI what would my visitation schedule look like. Mum says that she would allow maybe a week or so during summer and a few days at Christmas & Spring. The GAL comments that this would be a significant change in contact for my little girl. Her final question was perhaps the best of all. She asks her if we could put any psychologist up here and they said that dad did not abuse his child would you believe them. She simply replied "No, I know he did it.".

Both attorneys rest but do offer of proof on some key items that we could not fit into the schedule. The judge takes the case under advisement and says that he will rule soon. There are close to 30 motions that need to be ruled on in this case and my attorney cautions me that we will likely not see anything until later this week at the earliest so for those of you wanting to know the outcome you will have to wait until then. I wish I could tell you but as of right now I do not have that information. I am cautiously optimistic but that is all I am willing to say right now.

I will try to answer any questions you might have.