A self-censored chronicle of family court dramas, lived by parents who lost all or some visitation with or custody of a child or children based on perjury and/or other false courtroom evidence
I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the handling of Mr. David Inguanzo’s case (Case No. 2008-029595-FC17) and the treatment he has received in the courtroom.
I am specifically troubled by the tone and conduct directed toward Mr. Inguanzo by Circuit Court Judge Valerie Manno-Schurr, as reflected in the official court transcripts. Mr. Inguanzo has consistently maintained that he has been the victim of false statements, including a documented false report made by Ms. Nixa Rose to a Miami-Dade Police Officer, an act that constitutes a felony under Florida law. The court’s apparent lack of acknowledgment of these concerns raises serious questions about fairness, impartiality, and due process.
In light of these issues, I respectfully request the following:
That Judge Valerie Manno-Schurr recuse herself from further involvement in Mr. Inguanzo’s proceedings to ensure the integrity and impartiality of the judicial process.
That the Court evaluate her continued role as Presiding Judge of the Family Division, given the gravity of the concerns raised.
That Mr. Inguanzo be immediately reunited with his daughter, Zoraya Inguanzo, through an order restoring normal and reasonable timesharing consistent with Florida law and the child’s best interests.
These requests are made in the hope of restoring confidence in the fairness of the proceedings and ensuring that all parties—especially the child—are treated with justice, dignity, and respect.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
STOP Denial of Reasonable Parent/Child Contact #StandUpForZoraya - PETITION
The Cause "Stand Up For Zoraya" celebrates the love fathers have for their daughters, inspiring them to embrace the important role they hold in their daughters' lives and to provide the love, nurture, and emotional support that only they can give. www.causes.com/campaigns/44302-stand-up-for-zoraya
Find Court Qualified "Supervised Visitation Monitor" - Once a week (for one hour) in Miami-Dade or Broward County. As Ordered by Judge Manno-Schurr on February 2nd, 2015. WILL PAY - Contact Stuart H. Abramson, Attorney at Law at (305) 270-7796
Obtain a Pro-Bono Guardian Ad Litem (GAL). See a photo of Dad's Motion for GAL Appointment filed by dad and denied by Judge Scott Silverman.
Dad initially (on 12/4/2008) petitioned the court for three things: 1. Pay Child Support 2. Shared Parental Responsibility and 3. Normal and reasonable Time-sharing. On July 8th, 2010 Dad was granted by Judge Maria Espinosa Dennis: 1. Child Support 2. Shared Parental Responsibility Judge Dennis stated in the Final Judgment that "Normal and reasonable time-sharing", like the one dad has with his son since 2004 from his divorce, will be granted upon absolute compliance with all items listed in Paragraph number 29 of the Final Judgment.
Dad has been in Family Court compliance since October of 2010.
Judge Manno-Schurr It is in the child's best interests that contact and visits be restored SWIFTLY and FULLY11th Judicial Circuit Family Court - Inguanzo vs. Rose 08-29595 - Began: 10/27/20082012 -
Linda J Gottlieb LMFT LCSW -
Resumption of Visits ~
It is in the child's best interests that contact and visits with the alienated parent be restored SWIFTLY and FULLY once the suspended contact was determined to be the result of unfounded DV allegations and/or because the alienating parent had unilaterally prevented the contact.
One of the more pernicious and destructive alienating maneuvers is the leveling of false abuse allegations against the targeted parent.
This emotional form of child abuse is by the alienating by a parent, then the traumatic results are equal to those of children who actually had suffered abused.
Exacerbating the damage, such allegations generally lead to the immediate suspension of all contact between the child and the targeted parent during the ensuing investigation. Not only is contact missed, it allows for the poisoning to continue with no possibility for the antidote of the meaningful contact between the child and the targeted parent. Furthering the damage to the child of the suspended contact, the alienating parent invariably informs the child that she/he has been abandoned by the targeted parent!
Paving the way for the resumption of visits and contact. Oh, really? Not so fast. This rarely happens because the alienating parent declares to the child's attorney (Liar Greenberg) and to the family court that the child is too afraid to have contact resumed with the targeted parent; and naturally these sentiments are validated by the brainwashed puppet child.
So the attorney for the child and the attorney for the alienating parent recommend the very slow resumption of contact----generally slower than watching grass grow. Some attorneys for the targeted parent have conveyed to me that this situation places them in a double-blind: if they ask for normal resumption of contact, the judge may deny everything. So frequently, the attorney for the targeted parent has little choice but to agree to the resumption of contact at a snail's pace and sometimes supervised.
What follows are the reasons for my previous declaration as provided by some of the lawyers and forensic evaluators whom I interviewed for my book. I will then provide my own explanation why this is dumb, dumb, dumb.
Attorney Paul Levitt represented the alienated parent in New York's landmark case regarding parental alienation, Young v. Young, which developed the case law about alienation which states, "A custodial parent's interference with the relationship between child and the noncustodial parent has been said to be an act so inconsistent with the best interests of the child as to per se raise a strong probability that the offending party is unfit to act as a custodial parent." Mr. Levitt stated the following in his interview regarding the resumption of visits, "When allegations are unfounded, it should not be a question of slowly reintroducing the alienated parent to his child. It should be a question of removing the child from the from the parent who prompted the child to make these allegations. We have been looking at it the wrong way. It shouldn't be how slowly the alienated parent should again develop the relationship with the child but rather how quickly we can remove the alienator from the relationship that she/he has with the child."
Lawyer for the Child, Susan Saltz, stated, "You can't give full rights immediately? I would say that's another way of depriving the children and the alienated parent of getting their relationship on the right track. You can't shoot your parents dead and then throw yourself on the mercy of the court because you are an orphan. The alienator is the one who caused the separation, and then they have the audacity to demand that things proceed at a snail space?"
Lawyer Robert Hiltzik stated in regards to the slow reinstatement of visits, "I know when this is done, it validates that something is wrong with the alienated parent by going slowly."
Forensic evaluator, Ray Havlicek, Ph.D., took issue with the suspension of visits to begin with. Particularly because his experience has been that, in the vast number of PAS cases, the sex abuse allegation is frivolous. His belief regarding this was stated as follows, "You don't suddenly stop visitation. If you stop the visitation, nine times out of 10 it is the wrong reason. The damage that this causes to the child's belief is immense. The child then thinks, 'Oh, now the judge is saying it about my father (mother.) My mother (father) must be right about him (her).' There is really a problem with this approach. The system must be changed."
Lawyer for the child, Evie Zarkadas, stated, "The residential parent has to lead the way. Children will take their cue from the residential parent. If the residential parent shows interest and is an instrumental force encouraging the relationship with the other parent, the visitation happens; it is never a problem!"
Attorney, Joshua Hecht, stated the following regarding the visit, "More is better because when the child is not with the alienated parent they are under the influence of the alienating parent so that has to be counteracted as much is possible."
Again referencing attorney, Robert Hiltzik, he stated "If you can't get your child to go on the visits, then you can't be the residential parent. Part of being a parent is that you tell the kids what to do. What happens when the child doesn't go to school? To medical appointments? So, if the child doesn't want to do something, they don't have to do it? We are making decisions for children all the time. Why are they allowed to decide whether or not to see the other parent?
I could not agree more with the wisdom of all my esteemed colleagues. There is NO scientific or credible research that supports the idea that going slowly with reinstating visits between the child and a loving parent needs to proceed at a snail's space. In fact, just the opposite is true. The professionals who intervene in child custody and visitation must cease and desist from enabling the alienator thereby perpetuating the alienation when they sanction the separation of children from their alienated parent.
Family Law Community-CPRW 2016 from Childrens Rights Florida on Vimeo.
Many of our members are mothers, fathers, and children who have withstood abundant hardship resulting from the current practices of what is generally described as the “Family Law Community.”
These injuries and insults include fraudulent, inefficient, harmful, and even dangerous services; an institutionalized culture of indifference to “clearly-established” liberties; insults to the autonomy and dignity of parents and children; extortion, robbery, abuse, and more, delivered at the hands of eager operators within the divorce industry. ~~ CPRW Vid1 - 2016
Should a woman who falsely accuses a man of rape go to jail?https://m.facebook.com/story.php…Should women who falsely accuse a man of rape go to jail?A absolutely YES and for any woman jail time for falsely accusing an innocent father of sexually abuse his toddler young child! To rape his children from his life and right to parenthood, and to extort him hundreds of thousands in extorted child support. Its called the Secret Plan " a father attorney observed for 25 YEARS ongoing. Usually 90% used against father's, rare but is used against innocent mothers. My second. RAW EVIL book is done fine tunning footnotes: On point how each Of the nine steps used against me. This Disease ( Felony) and the CURE Rx RAW EVIL: Kidnapped and Continuing. Efforts to Kidnap by Corrupt Judiciary and Judges done Texas Style; is US copyrighted Illegally using a Utah order in Texas ( kidnapped this father) almost died in jail, emergency room admission that night severe hypothermia; and acute malignant hypertension _ 182/142 blood pressure with chest pain; severe adrenaline release due to life threatening hypothermia.Falsely alleged I violated a TX protective order "communication"A lie as October 2007 mediation agreement allowed ; so almost physically died for " sending a birthday present indirectly to his uncle in law for his fifth birthday December 6th 2007"For a 5$ or more donation email me -- WilliamWyttenbach@gmail.comWill send pdf to you. Five plus more RAW EVIL books on the way; By the way if anyone knows a deep pocket republican law firm in or out of Texas to file a Hugh civil trial jury trial demanded up front action against bio mother, four corrupt judges, three plus attorneys for multiple millions; email me. I will email their firm the pdf.Thank you for any and all help ; even if a call or letter to criminal district attorney Rodriquez in Hidalgo county tasked to respond to my US AGO ; TX AGO Formal Request for Criminal Grand Jury investigation.Also, US Supreme court case No. 15-4You can read online their web site. If a win a win for all parents and children in this nation.William Wyttenbach, M.D.Support. www.DivorceCorp.comDivorceCorp DVD you can get on Netflix now.
Our children are not income checks for mothers, lawyers judges and child service social workers! Parent alienation is child abuse and false accusations by mothers and Lawyers using them for higher fees is illegal and perjury! Parents are not visitors equal parenting laws need to be the subject of the day!
The Cause "Stand Up For Zoraya" celebrates the love fathers have for their daughters, inspiring them to embrace the important role they hold in their daughters' lives and to provide the love, nurture, and emotional support that only they can give. www.causes.com/campaigns/44302-stand-up-for-zoraya
#StandUpForZoraya #ILoveAndNeedMyDaughter #EndParentalAlienation
ReplyDelete