Ever been deeply mad? I don’t mean the general angry we all sometimes get, conjoined with an outburst that vents our feelings to the world. I mean a deep in your heart and soul type of anger that seethes inside with no means of escape.
Welcome to my world.
It all started with false accusations, progressed through a corrupt court system (my opinion), mental “poisoning” and ending with a clearly unfair ruling by (again) the court system.
THE STORY
The story really begins before I am ever part of the family. So, with a short version of an intro lets introduce the family, Mom and Dad. Trying to have children. Finally, they achieve a miracle and have a beautiful little girl. Tragically, the child is taken from them at only 88 days of age. The parents, still wanting and wishing for a child, venture into the rigors of adoption. They finally receive the news that they had hoped for. They adopted a newborn boy. Then they try something different. The mother so wished to give birth to a child and again some wishes come true… A beautiful little girl.
The father, in the meantime, has ongoing medical conditions and requires surgery. After the surgery and shortly after the birth of the girl, dad leaves the family home, never to return to the family unit except for very occasional visits.
Jump ahead fifteen months…I enter the picture and start my first steps into the family that I have grown to love.
Throughout the time that I have been with the family, the “father”, (John) and I use that term loosely, would schedule visits with the children. On nearly every occasion he would call on the day of the visit to cancel and always have an excuse for not being able to show up. He promised these visits and cancelled so many times that the boy soon to learn not to expect “dad” to show up.
Again…Let’s make another “jump”.
On July 11th, 2017 John had a scheduled visitation day with the kids. He picked them up as scheduled and took them for the planned outing. They were supposed to be returned home at 7:00 pm that day. At 7:30 pm we began to worry about the kids as they have not been returned home. We tried to call John but could not get in contact with him. At the same time, we were trying to call John the house phone rang.
So, the nightmare began…
It was the county Sheriff letting us know that John had come into The Precinct Station and turned the children over to Child Protective Service with accusations of physical and sexual abuse of the children.
The kids were taken to a medical facility for evaluation, and then moved to a “safe house” until the CPS investigators could finish interviews and evaluations. We then had a CPS Family Team Decision Meeting, on the 14th of July. We discussed the family situation, and the results of the investigation. There was no indication from the children, medical evaluation teams or CPS, that any abuse had taken place, so the children were returned to us.
While the children were returned to us at the CPS office, John had his attorney serve papers to Ann to appear in court…three hours later. We had no attorney prepared to represent us in court. In the courtroom was Pierce County Court Commissioner Greg Adams. Severe restrictions were imposed placing the children in the custody of John Ross, with the mother to not have any contact with John or the children until the next court appearance. Keeping in mind that CPS had determined that no abuse had taken place. Additionally, I was ordered to have no contact with the children. Let’s keep these orders in mind as I continue the story.
Before I continue, let me outline our living/working situation to better see the seriousness of these restrictions.
We owned our business and the business was located 12 feet from the home that we lived in. Ann (wife) had a medical condition that although did not render her completely paralyzed did restrict her from some of the daily functions of the work required. I took over most of the daily duties of the business. The business was operated 7 days a week with active hours from 7 am till 9 pm daily…every day, 365 days a year.
So, The Commissioner imposed restrictions that included my having “no contact” with the children. With such restrictions in place, this meant that when the children were home then I could not be there. Since the children, mom and I all lived at the same residence this means that anytime the children were home I could not be there.
This also means that because of the proximity of our business to home, we would have to close the business any time the children were home.
On the first appearance before Comm. Ahrens (Just for reference, keep this name in mind, she comes into play a few times during this story. Several times Ann goes in front of Commissioner Ahrens and never with a result you would expect), she imposed restrictions on Ann that continued to restrict visits to the home the children have known their entire lives. Later at the next appearance before Comm. Ahrens, additional restrictions were imposed…including continued “no contact” with the stepfather (me) and supervised visitation only for the mother. For those that are not familiar with Supervised Visitation, this requires that visitation be arranged, a county approved person must be with the mother and children throughout the visitation period. All paid for by ONLY the mother.
Because the children attended a Catholic school, certain requirements are put on the parent(s). Tuition is paid and additionally parents must provide volunteer time to the school. Ann would volunteer to help in the school library as part of that service. She continued to provide this volunteer service throughout these proceedings. Suddenly Ann was called back before Comm. Ahrens. This time for contempt of court. Apparently being at a Church/School does not meet the requirement for having supervisors around. She was found to be in contempt and fined.
Again, keep in mind that CPS or any other investigators had found NO REASON for accusations leveled against the mother or stepfather.
Generally, here are the accusations made by John.;
1. Hitting the children with a paint stick.
2. Hit girl child in the face resulting in a bruise on the cheek.
3. Unsecured handguns in reach of children.
4. Children being forced to work in Kennel (business).
5. Withholding of father’s residential time.
6. Requiring John to pay to attend children’s parties.
7. John physically afraid of Ann and stepfather (Gary).
8. Sexual abuse of girl child.
9. Relinquishing custody.
10. Simon unkempt.
11. “Pantsing game”.
Let’s go over each of these accusations, then see what Judge Karena Kirkendoll finds.
1. Admittedly, I did spank the children with a paint stick. I know that in recent years “spanking” has become less and less popular as a form of discipline. And any argument I may make in defense of this practice will either be immediately rejected or supported. Only saying at this point that the paint stick was a small 12 inches long by 1-inch wide light stick. It was not the primary form of punishment. And later after naming it after one of the children, it was not even needed. Just the mention of the stick would be enough.
2. John (father) was the only one that made this accusation. The child in question, at the medical intake for CPS, told the attending medical staff, that she had been playing with one of the family pets (Hope, German Shorthair Pointer dog), she tripped and hit the corner of a piece of furniture, resulting in the bruise. The girl tends to trip, mainly because she is so energetic. Back in the day, we called it clumsiness.
3. John provided a picture that showed a pistol on a shelf unsecured. The weapon was on a shelf 77 inches above the floor. It is in view of anyone in the kitchen or family room of the residence and normally carried in a holster. Judge Kirkendoll, in her infinite wisdom, found it hard to believe that a shelf 77 inches above the floor level would be plausible. The owner of the weapon is 74 + inches tall. Why would I put a weapon on a shelf below me? Also, the question was never asked, that if the weapon was not under the supervision of an adult…who took the picture? The picture used as evidence, clearly shows that the picture was taken from below, the shelf being 77 inches high, anyone would see it from below.
4. The children did work in the kennel. They also swept floors, took out trash, did dishes, laundry and helped maintain the family property. These are called “chores”. A chart was maintained in the household for the purpose of recording chores done and by whom. This record was kept determining the monetary allowance for each child. Each chore had a value and each chore done would result in the amount of the allowance for each child. Again, I know we are moving to an age of the “entitled” generation. Regardless of your view of chores and reward, it is my personal view that everyone must earn what they receive. As adults, we are tasked with teaching our children how to move on through life. One of those lessons should be that to get paid, you must work. I have never worked for anyone that would pay me to do nothing. This lesson should be learned early and instilled in our children for the future.
5. The father (John) was provided ample opportunities to visit the children. Since 2011 when I came into the family, John would schedule time with the children. On nearly every scheduled day of his visit he would call and cancel. The children would continually look forward to each visit but be disappointed when he would not show up. John would show up for his visitation maybe 3 time a year, up until he filed this court action. Then suddenly he was a candidate for “Father of the Year”.
6. We would have parties for each of the children’s birthdays. Sometime these parties would consist of food, drinks and venues. And sometimes these parties would come at a substantial cost. My personal view on this matter is not important. But it did make the children happy. On occasion John would “invite” himself. When he did ask to join in, we would ask for him to contribute half the cost of the celebration. Does it really seem fair that Ann and I put together the venue (cost), food (cost), drinks (cost) and activities (cost) and John reaping the benefits of our planning, preparation and funding? Seeing as he had NEVER contributed financially to the children’s upbringing, asking for him to at least contribute to their parties seems like little to ask.
7. I don’t even know where to go with this one. I never threatened John. I rarely talked to him. Over all these years I have had no more than 12 conversations with him.
8. The daughter was never sexually abused. Medical examinations added to her own statements to CPS and medical staff clearly showed not only no abuse but also no fear on her part of either parent. The sexual “grooming” is something that John found on the most reliable source he could find (Oprha.com).
9. The school that the daughter attended reported that she was asking a teacher if she could “help” commit suicide. At a physical exam there was evidence and concern that she was pulling out her own hair in frustration. The child, having to jump back and forth between one parent and another was suffering emotional stress. Not knowing what else to do because of family, emotional and business situations, we decided that in the best interest of the child’s welfare, John could have them on a temporary basis until the court made its final decision. Evidently in the eyes of the court, the six months that John took care of the children, far outweigh the 9 years that the children were with the mother with no assistance from John.
10. Yes, admittedly the son did go through a period. He would avoid baths or showers. All kids go through a period in their young years where personal appearance is not the highlight issue of the day. And it was mentioned in one parent-teacher conference that there was an issue. We immediately began to insist that he shower every morning before dressing for school. Note: this incident was 3 years before this case was tried.
11. The “Pantsing game” was a internet sensation for a bit. It was a fun game to play. And not just with the daughter. Everyone was subject to the “pantsing game”, even me.
Moving on.
At trial John’s medical and mental conditions were brought up. John suffers from a permanent mental condition called Bipolar Type II. It is a lifelong condition, diagnosed only by a psychiatrist. He was diagnosed in February of 2001 by Dr. Jessy Ang. During the trial Dr. Arnette (John’s personal physician) testified that John may have been mis diagnosed. Although Dr. Arnette may be a great medical doctor. He is not qualified to evaluate Bipolar mental conditions.
Side note: John and Dr. Arnette both testified in court, before Judge Kirkendoll that he is no longer suffering from conditions preventing him from living a normal life. If so, why is it that John is still suckling off the teat of the average citizen and still drawing Social Security payments for the disability that he no longer suffers? Which is it? Cured, mis diagnosed or still disabled? Pick one.
It was evident on the first day of testimony that John’s condition is only marginally controlled. Having come to court without taking his medications, under questioning he became irritable, confused and broke down crying to the point that the court had to take a break for time for him to regain some composure.
This case became more frustrating as we provided a substantial list of medical, personal, family and professional witnesses to collaborate our position. John had one witness, Dr. Arnette who was there as an “expert” witness, who truthfully could not provide accurate information on John’s mental condition. Because of so called “time and court scheduling” issues, all our witnesses were not heard. Those that were heard provided “little substantial evidence “or were simply not “credible”. It strikes me as odd (?) that the witnesses that we called were not deemed credible, yet the one witness that John had was not even qualified to speak on his mental condition.
It was also obvious that John was discussing the progress of the case with the children even though he was ordered not to. Judge Kirkendoll DID agree that there was evidence to support the claim, but she would not agree that it happened before the order was established. It had always been part of the original order of the court.
What the Judge said about the trial:
“In this case the parties, particularly the mother, presented an extremely large quantity of evidence over almost four days of trial, much of which provided little or no relevant information. Medical records, academic records, and counseling records for these young children for many years’ past were examined. The availability of school lunch programs, the messy conditions of children’s rooms, Delia’s clothing choices and snack choices, storage facilities, air beds, antique furniture, the brunch available at Miramar (Mirabella, Seattle, WA), the food choices at Swedish Hall, how many LEGOs Simon has, the funeral expenses for the unfortunate death of another child years ago, et cetera, did not help this trier of fact analyze what is ultimately in the children’s best interest, but served to create an unwieldy amount of information with little substantive value.
This Court did not find the mother, Ann Heneghan, to be wholly credible. The evidence does not support her presentation of the case. Much of her testimony consisted of withering descriptions of Mr. Ross’s actions or inactions, painting him in the worst light possible, while making herself seem rational and virtuous rehashing half-truths from years past, insisting that Mr. Ross continues to suffer from mental health issues when medical testimony indicates he does not, and defending the numerous actions by her and her husband, which ultimately served to alienate and displace the father. The fact that she unilaterally relinquished these children to their father under these circumstances after a petition for modification had been filed and now seeks to have the children returned to her is perplexing”.
What I find “perplexing” is that a court that “claims” to be looking out for the best interest of the children as a priority, would rule against the only real parents the children had known for the better part of 9 years. It is also unconscionable to go into court with binders on top of binders with evidence to disprove false allegations, only to watch the court system fail to protect the ones they are there to serve in the first place.
My view of the events is my opinion only. You can draw your own conclusions. Of course, It could be said that my view is prejudice as there always is two sides to every story. This is mine.
I find the whole thing to be a fully planned attack on the family. I cannot see any possible way that a person (John) could make up a full list of accusations, turn the children over to County Sheriff and sub sequentially Child Protective Service and three days later have a full binder with attorney and present it to us the CPS Family meeting.
This action alone brings into question the integrity of both the client (John) and his attorney’s firm. If John had thought that the children were being abused, shouldn’t he have reported it immediately? Not put together for months of documentation, prepare an attorney and set a court date.
Let me insert a lesson learned here. Stepparents have no rights. Even though I was accused of physical, mental and sexual abuse, and the action taken against us as a family, to which I had become a part of, I had no rights in court to directly defend myself.
Conclusion:
What kind of “parent” would invent false allegations’ and turn children over to Law enforcement, and ultimately Child Protection Services. All claims by the father were immediately proved to be false. CPS’ own documentation after medical evaluation, children’s statements and personal interviews of family and children, including home visit and residential inspection found that the accusations were false and unfounded. Yet Judge Kirkendoll found “no compelling evidence” to support our case.
In the Pierce County Superior Court system it is obvious that it does not matter how much time and effort you put into it, how much evidence you put together to prove your position, how many witnesses you gather (all having first hand knowledge) to come forward and state the truth.
Six months of supposedly caring for the children by living in hotels and only fast food. Constant lying to the children to the point that they are angry anytime they visit the only home they have ever known is perfectly fine to the “family courts” in Pierce County, WA. As compared to 9 years of stable family life in a caring home.
In The state of Washington NEVER EVER assume that because you are doing all the “right” things. I had always been led to believe that if you are doing right, good and being truthful in all actions and deeds, you never have to fear false charges. I am an Army veteran and have spent a lifetime learning and doing what I believed to be the right thing (integrity) at all cost. Right or wrong my reputation was never in question.
Watching the way, the court was handled, the Judge (Kirkendoll) was constantly on her feet. As each person was called to the stand, she was looking over the binders upon binders of exhibits. I continued to believe that because she was looking over the evidence as it was presented, that the outcome was going to be fair and just. The children would be returned to us and we could simply get on with our lives.
Fair and Just are just a figment of our imagination. Doing the right thing, proving that you had the best interest of the children in mind in all your actions and even having local government entities in your support, have nothing to do with the courts deciding what is the fair thing to do. They will only lean in the direction of the one that can best support their position.
I now know why so many people mistrust the Law Enforcement and court system so much.
We struggled over every accusation. But I ultimately continued to hold that if we were truthful and presented evidence that disproved all allegations, it was all going to be okay. We would have our day in court, present the facts and bring witnesses to substantiate our position, we would soon have our kids back and life would go on. It NEVER occurred to me that the judge would have the option to “Pick and Choose” what evidence she would believe, dismiss or outright reject. And in the meantime, the court can believe whatever evidence is presented even if that evidence is given by those unqualified to present it.
The scales of justice are not controlled by proven law. It is balanced only by the weight of evidence (true or false) put on each side of the scale.
Fisheagle7's Blog 