Task Force to Study Legal Disputes Involving the Care & Custody of Minor Children — Public Hearing
Below is a list of speakers in sequential order, with a brief description of their testimony and relevant links if applicable. Each summary also provides the corresponding time stamp for the start and end of their testimony, as well as the conclusion of their question/answer segment. Use this link to view all testimony.
| | |
 |
|
Task Force Co-Chairs welcomed attendees and commenced the meeting at 10:15 am. After brief remarks about safety and security protocols, they provided a framework for the oral testimony which would be limited to 3 minutes per speaker, plus time to address questions by Task Force members, if any. Nearly 60 individuals signed up to give oral testimony, with 20 more signing up during the day. Given the length of the hearing, only 59 speakers actually gave testimony with the meeting concluding past midnight.
Segment Starts: 00:00:00 | Segment Ends: 00:06:59
| |  |
|
Eleven hours into the hearing (approximately 10:00pm), and still 3+ hours before the hearing would ultimately end, Representative Ed Vargas (D) 6th District, noted on the record that he was concerned about how many of those who testified during the hearing expressed fear of retaliation from judges, GALs, AMCs or others connectected with their ongoing cases in Connecticut Family Court. He offered his personal cell phone number, asking to be contacted with details from anyone who feels they are retaliated against after exercizing their Constitutional right to give public testimony at this hearing. State Rep. Minnie Gonzalez followed in kind by also offering her cell number.
Rep. Ed Vargas: (860) 559-1018 | Rep. Minnie Gonzalez: (860) 655-5907
Segment Starts: 11:04:50 | Segment Ends: 11:06:25
| |  |
|
A parent from Southbury, she has worked for nearly two decades with victims of the Connecticut Family Court system. Having completed the Connecticut Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) training, Joan emphasized the needs to truly act in the best interest of the children of divorce and shared her opinion that, "GALs should not be attorneys — Psych 101 is not enough education." Recommended a '3 Strikes, You're Out' program. Executive Director and Founder of Parental Alienation Support and Intervention.
Testimony Starts: 00:07:00 | Testimony Ends: 00:11:20 | Q&A Ends: 00:18:05
| |  |
|
A Staff Attorney with the New Haven Legal Assistance Association (NHLAA), gave 30 minutes of testimony (including questions and answers) highlighting the services provided, primarily to low income clients involved in family cases. The Association gives priority to representing victims of domestic violence, many of whom have young children. He spoke in support of the roles GALs and AMCs play in such cases.
Testimony Starts: 00:18:40 | Testimony Ends: 00:22:10 | Q&A Ends: 00:47:25
| |  |
|
Given the large turnout of interested speakers, there was frustration expressed very early on during the hearing with the pace of the proceedings and the fear that if agency speaker were given such a large block of time to speak and/or respond at length to numerous questions, it would likely prevent many of the parents impacted by the system and in attendance from offering up meaningful testimony and recommendations based on their personal experience in dealing with the Connecticut Family Court and related personnel.
Segment Starts: 00:41:20 | Segment Ends: 00:45:45 | WTNH-TV News
| |  |
|
A grandmother from Massachusetts (with a J.D. degree and significant legal experience), Ms. Martowska gave testimony in favor of a presumption of shared parenting, describing her efforts to support her son who has been prevented from seeing his daughter for over a year and with a 'patchwork of visitation' for nearly eight years in spite of 2007 orders. She notes having spent over $320,000 on attorney and GAL fees.
Testimony Starts: 00:47:50 | Testimony Ends: 00:53:10
| |  |
|
As Chair of the Shared Parenting Counsel of Connecticut, Mr. Clapp testified in support of a presumption for shared custody (absent abuse or neglect). He shared his personal experience while navigating divorce and custody acting primarily as a pro se party and the failings of the Court decades earlier. He described a 'process' he and his wife worked through to arrive at a custody agreement for shared parenting.
Testimony Starts: 00:53:25 | Testimony Ends: 00:56:52 | Q&A Ends: 01:02:50
| |  |
|
Gave testimony supporting a presumption of both shared physical and legal custody, but also stressed the need for the Court to enforce provisions of such agreements and orders. He was critical of attorneys involved in the process, noting combined legal fees of $33,000 in his 1995-1997 divorce. Mr. Mulready was one of several who also noted a violation of his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Testimony Starts: 01:03:10 | Testimony Ends: 01:06:40
| |  |
|
Representing the Forensic Division of the Connecticut Psychological Association, they gave combined testimony as input to the Task Force, noting their respective backgrounds in dealing with GALs and Judges and having been involved in some of the most high-conflict custody cases in the state. Dr. Lyda noted that the majority (90%) of custody cases brought before the Court do not need a GAL and are resolved 'relatively easily.' High-conflict divorce, on the other hand, is shown to inflict great harm on children of divorce. They asked Task Force members to separate the issues of 'physical custody,' 'shared parenting time' and 'decision making' as they are distinctly different issues. Both noted that a presumption of equal parenting is problematic and that each case brings with it unique circumstances that need to be considered, but also noted that alienated children are those that have the most problems over time. Dr. Cheyne noted that while alienation occurs less often than is claimed, there needs to be enforcement and penalties in those cases where alienation is demonstrated to exist. She described alienation as 'a real and awful thing.'
Testimony Starts: 01:07:10 | Testimony Ends: 01:14:40 | Q&A Ends: 01:23:50
| | 
 |
|
Attorney Pripstein gave testimony representing Greater Hartford Legal Aid, Inc. in opposition to a presumption of shared parenting (e.g. - approximately equal parenting time for each parent). She claimed there is no imperical evidence that 50/50 shared physical custody is in the best interest of the children, and emphasized each child's need for stability. Atty. Pripstein noted issues of a history of domestic violence, substance abuse, and parents living in different towns as among those cases where an equal sharing of physical custody is unlikely to work in the best interest of the child.
Testimony Starts: 01:24:08 | Testimony Ends: 01:27:05
| |  |
|
A divorced father with shared physical custody, he gave testimony in support of a presumption of equally shared physical custody as a means to remove the financial incentive that he feels some attorneys and litigants use to pursue a more controlling, unbalanced custody order. He noted that children are being used as pawns in the State of Connecticut in 'a perverse game of legal chess' which is bankrupting families, stripping them of funds that should be preserved for their children's education, all of which is causing harm to children and families of divorce in Connecticut.
Testimony Starts: 01:27:10 | Testimony Ends: 01:32:30 | Q&A Ends: 01:53:48
| |  |
|
A well known and widely respected journalist, Ms. Stevenson spoke of her concern following interviews with numerous families struggling to survive abusive practices of the Connecticut Family Court. She noted the lack of transparency, the questionable nature of GAL assignments, and the financial burden placed on parents with no true means of recourse. Ms. Stevenson's testimony was later discussed on the National stage by former prosecutor Wendy Murphy, now FOX News / CNN / MSNBC guest legal analyst.
Testimony Starts: 01:54:45 | Testimony Ends: 02:00:05 | Q&A Ends: 02:13:00
| |  |
|
Mr. Garcia gave very personal testimony in support of a presumption of shared physical custody. He relayed details from his divorce and custody dispute, noting he had expressed concern to family relations about the safety of his son while in the care of the mother due to her relationship with a certain individual. The father's concerns had a tragic end on October 6, 2009, when his son, Pedro Garcia IV, was rushed to the hospital and later died from injuries sustained at the hands of the same person complained of.
Testimony Starts: 02:13:55 | Testimony Ends: 02:17:00 | Q&A Ends: 02:17:20
| |  |
|
Ms. Hart relayed details from her experience with the Connecticut Family Court, critical of the role and mandated fees of GALs. She testified in support of a presumption of shared physical custody, noted that Guardians Ad Litem (GALs) should not be attorneys, and that the Court needs to enforce compliance with orders under Sec. 46b-56, with mandatory consequences for offenders.
Testimony Starts: 02:17:30 | Testimony Ends: 02:21:40 | Q&A Ends: 02:27:40
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 02:27:55 | Testimony Ends: 02:33:00 | Q&A Ends: 02:48:40
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 02:49:05 | Testimony Ends: 02:54:30 | Q&A Ends: 03:06:45
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 03:07:00 | Testimony Ends: 03:11:15 | Q&A Ends: 03:19:45
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 03:20:00 | Testimony Ends: 03:25:30 | Q&A Ends: 03:46:40
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 03:46:50 | Testimony Ends: 03:52:45 | Q&A Ends: 03:59:15
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 04:00:15 | Testimony Ends: 04:03:45 | Q&A Ends: 04:13:15
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 04:13:55 | Testimony Ends: 04:21:45 | Q&A Ends: 04:30:30
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 04:31:30 | Testimony Ends: 04:35:30 | Q&A Ends: 04:39:30
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 04:40:20 | Testimony Ends: 04:44:02 | Q&A Ends: 04:46:35
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 04:46:45 | Testimony Ends: 04:51:20 | Q&A Ends: 05:03:05
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
She has written and recorded a song about her experience: 'My Child Be Home Soon'
Testimony Starts: 05:03:35 | Testimony Ends: 05:09:40 | Q&A Ends: 05:13:20
| |  |
|
A teacher from Yale University and victim of family violence, Mr. Newton gave personal testimony and spoke highly of the role the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) played in his very adversarial divorce case. He has sole custody of his son and recommends the Judiciary be far better equipped to identify extreme personality disorders which, in his view, lead to the most extreme divorce cases. He noted that 50/50 custody is likely fine in "most cases" and that the children would benefit as a result, but felt that in 10% of cases where both parents aren't "normal," the role of GAL is critical.
Testimony Starts: 05:14:25 | Testimony Ends: 05:18:45 | Q&A Ends: 05:20:25
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 05:20:30 | Testimony Ends: 05:24:28 | Q&A Ends: 05:46:05
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 05:47:35 | Testimony Ends: 05:51:40 | Q&A Ends: 05:52:50
| |  |
|
A doctor and medical educator from Massachusetts, with a special interest in the issues of alienation and estrangement, issues for which he counsels parents. He noted that parental alienation is indeed a serious problem and recognized as such. He notes that he does not use the term 'syndrome' soas to avoid the controversy, but it is a phenomena. Among items recommended, Dr. Miller notes that trained expert with a sub-specialty in alienation and estrangement should be evaluating cases since they see it all the time, not a mental health professional who rarely sees it.
Testimony Starts: 05:53:30 | Testimony Ends: 05:57:50 | Q&A Ends: 06:20:05
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 06:20:15 | Testimony Ends: 06:28:15 | Q&A Ends: 06:33:55
| |  |
|
Mr. Mastrangelo gave personal testimony about his long-standing custody controversy in the Connecticut Family Court. The father of 14-year-old triplets, he divorced in 2007. He supports shared parenting, but has not been with his children for three and one-half years, describing his case as the "poster child for parental alienation." He shared his opinion that GALs and AMCs are unnecessarily complicating cases with little or no oversight, primarily as a means to generate revenue for themselves. He noted having spent over $130,000 thus far, and was critical of the process which makes it virtually impossible to have either a GAL or AMC removed from a case. Mastrangelo suggests Connecticut look to meaningful reform achieved in Arizona, Maine, and Massachusetts or even to the system in use throughout Connecticut for indigent families.
Testimony Starts: 06:34:50 | Testimony Ends: 06:42:25 | Q&A Ends: 07:11:35
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 07:12:35 | Testimony Ends: 07:16:10 | Q&A Ends: 07:24:45
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 07:25:00 | Testimony Ends: 07:27:10 | Q&A Ends: 07:29:45
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 07:30:00 | Testimony Ends: 07:38:32 | Q&A Ends: 07:41:50
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 07:42:45 | Testimony Ends: 07:48:10 | Q&A Ends: 08:00:10
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 08:08:00 | Testimony Ends: 08:11:30 | Q&A Ends: 08:16:47
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 08:17:00 | Testimony Ends: 08:21:10 | Q&A Ends: 08:23:20
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 08:24:00 | Testimony Ends: 08:29:10 | Q&A Ends: 08:31:40
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 08:31:55 | Testimony Ends: 08:37:35 | Q&A Ends: 08:42:10
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 08:42:25 | Testimony Ends: 08:48:20 | Q&A Ends: 08:49:30
| |  |
|
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 08:57:00 | Testimony Ends: 09:01:55
| | 
 |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 09:02:30 | Testimony Ends: 09:07:50
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 09:08:00 | Testimony Ends: 09:12:45 | Q&A Ends: 09:25:35
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 09:30:15 | Testimony Ends: 09:36:20 | Q&A Ends: 09:52:00
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Arrest records for Ms. Kerwick's former husband, Kenneth Savino
Testimony Starts: 09:52:30 | Testimony Ends: 09:55:35 | Q&A Ends: 10:14:20
| |  |
|
A resident of Westport (Fairfield County) and father of 3 young children, Mr. Sargent testifed to prolonged abuse at the hands of the Connecticut Family Court. He notes that he has sole legal custody of his children who live with him 7 days per week. After questing GAL fees, he was the victim of retaliation, including a threat by the GAL to put his children in foster care. He would ultimately file suit in Federal Court to have his GAL removed. Although a stay-at-home dad currently, Mr. Sargent's professional and legal background provide a strong foundation for his observations and recommendations.
Testimony Starts: 10:14:40 | Testimony Ends: 10:24:05 | Q&A Ends: 10:50:30
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 10:51:00 | Testimony Ends: 10:59:45 | Q&A Ends: 11:06:40
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 11:07:35 | Testimony Ends: 11:18:00 | Q&A Ends: 11:22:15
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 11:22:40 | Testimony Ends: 11:28:50 | Q&A Ends: 11:32:00
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 11:33:05 | Testimony Ends: 11:38:40
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 11:39:05 | Testimony Ends: 11:45:45
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 11:46:15 | Testimony Ends: 11:54:10 | Q&A Ends: 11:55:20
| |  |
|
A long-time advocate for Connecticut Family Court reform, she testified from her personal experience having not seen her child for an extended period, noting the problems with the Department of Children and Families (DCF) and failure of the Court's to follow Constitutional rights of due process, among other flaws.
Testimony Starts: 11:56:45 | Testimony Ends: 12:06:30 | Q&A Ends: 12:08:15
| |  |
|
A mother involved in a highly contested divorce and related custody dispute, she has been prevented from seeing her children for an extended period and is highly critical both of the role of the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL), as well as many aspects of the Court.
Testimony Starts: 12:08:45 | Testimony Ends: 12:16:38 | Q&A Ends: 12:26:35
| |  |
|
The father of a 9-year old daughter, Mr. Stevens shared stunning details of his ordeal in Connecticut Family Court. Following the filing of his 2009 divorce action, he stated his then wife filed 38 police reports over a 10-11 week period. After 3 failed attempts to get a restraining order, she obtained one on her 4th attempt which led to his arrest for hugging his daughter while volunteering at her school. Mr. Stevens bond was set at $750,000 and he ultimately spent 5 months, 17 days in jail. He has seen his daughter just 6 times in 6 years, even though his former wife was arrested for capital felony murder for hire and the criminal trial is set to commence in February 2014.
Testimony Starts: 12:26:50 | Testimony Ends: 12:34:10 | Q&A Ends: 12:38:35
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 12:38:45 | Testimony Ends: 12:43:30 | Q&A Ends: 12:47:25
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 12:47:45 | Testimony Ends: 13:00:05 | Q&A Ends: 13:34:15
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 13:34:35 | Testimony Ends: 13:44:30 | Q&A Ends: 13:59:15
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 13:59:25 | Testimony Ends: 14:10:25
| |  |
|
Summary to follow . . .
Testimony Starts: 14:10:40 | Testimony Ends: 14:20:00 | Q&A Ends: 14:20:20
| |  |
|
In addition to the 59 individuals above who gave public testimony during the 14-hour hearing, there were more than two dozen others who submitted written testimony, but were unable to present in person given the large turnout and length of the hearing. Where possible, we have summarized additional testimony below.
|
|
Connecticut attorney Paul Greenan was interviewed by NBC as the public hearing was in session. He described a system which he believes is failing our State's children, while proving to be a financial gold mine for some court-appointed GAL's and AMC's. Court filings in his own divorce case show his family was billed more than $252,000 by an AMC (Melissa Needle, Esq.) and GAL (Eric Broder, Esq.) who, collectively, spent less than 5 hours with his two children over a 2-year period. One court record indicates the GAL charged $625 for an "ice cream visit" with the parties children. It was revealed after nearly 11-days of a custody trial that the AMC had never communicated with either of the couple's children. Court records also contain correspondence and testimony alleging additional and more serious misconduct, including an attempt by the AMC and GAL to solicit tens of thousands of dollars from Attorney Greenan in exchange for a favorable custody outcome, with such payments to be disguised as "drafting fees."
| |  |
|
