12 years ago today 7-31-2000, Rikki Dombrowski was taken from her mother Claudine Dombrowski and given to convicted batterer and Criminal HAL RICHARDSON, Topeka, KS Case No. 96-D-217

 

Topeka, Kansas Case No. 96-D-217 Third Judicial District, Shawnee County, Kansas

 

MAHNATTAN FREE PRESS: COURTS CONTINUE TO ABUSE BATTERED MOTHER 

MANHATTAN, KS - To some this could be considered beautiful. Solid mahogany is beautiful when given a high finish and it does have a high finish. It is about four to four and a half feet long, a foot and a half high; with shinny brass handles at the foot and head. A child's coffin, in this home has been turned into a coffee table. Continue Reading >

 

Claudine & Rikki Dombrowski-- before Family Court Mafia gave custody to the Abuser--moon shadow

HELL HAS A SPECIAL PLACE FOR ALL ABUSERS and ENABLERS (aka child traffickers) that have and are continuing the  abuse by Hal Richardson. With the help of the local Court Whores, M. Jill Dykes, Rene M. Netherton, Judge David Debenham, Don and Jason Hoffman

Twelve years ago today Rikki Dombrowski was taken from her mother Claudine Dombrowski and given to a convicted batterer on a ‘snail mail’  from crooked Judge Richard Anderson. He made a ‘deal’ and without motion from either party, without hearing he simply on his own ‘switched custody’ from Mother to ABUSER HAL RICHARDSON.

Mother Claudine Dombrowski has had little to no contact with her daughter since this illegal ‘action’ and ruling was made. The Judges following after this decision could have at anytime corrected a very wrong very unethical very damaging ruling.

Instead, they continued ‘litigation abuse’ of a battered mother and forced her only child- HER daughter to live with out her mother and in constant fear.

View this document on Scribd

 

2000 July 31– Custody Switch-Judge Richard Anderson Gives FULL custody to CRIMINAL HAL RICHARDSON

 

HAL RICHARDSON – COURT CRIMINAL RECORDS OF; VIOLENCE, BATTERY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, BATTERY AGAINST CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, DRUGS, ALCOHOL, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, BAR FIGHTS ETC…

WHAT KIND A EVIL BASTARD WOULD HURT HIS CHILD SO BADLY BY TAKING HER MOTHER AWAY FROM HER? RIKKI DOMBROWSKI THE WORLD IS APPALLED, KANSAS IS SICK. THIS MAN WILL KNOW JUSTICE ONE DAY—GOD WILL JUDGE ALL WHO HELPED TO KEEP YOU SEPERATED FROM YOUR LOVING MOTHER.

GOD’S JUDGEMENT DAY—AND TOPEKA KANSAS WILL BURN

95LA014502-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,, (aka)1OR
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,, (aka)2OE
95D 000419-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
95D 000419-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1OR
97LA009121-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
98LA006122-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
92CV000432-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
96CV000937-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
92LA000089-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
96LA012692-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
97LA017898-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
97U 000055-RICHARDSON,HAL,,D/B/A/ TOPEKA VINYL TOP,1D
90LA007629-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA GATEWAY FUNDRAISING,1D
97LA018158-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA MINUTEMAN SOLAR FILM,1D
96LA003402-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA TOPEKA VINYL TOP CENTER,1D
98U 000141-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA TOPEKA VINYL TOP CENTER,1D
04SC000200-RICHARDSON,HAL,,III,1D
03C 000086-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR TRACT 84,184D
95U 000500-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
03L 010117-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
05L 001833-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
95SC000448-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
95LN000161-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1OP
05C 001464-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,TRACT 76, (aka)133D
94SC000355-RICHARDSON,HAL,,OWNER OF MINUTEMAN SOLAR FILM,1D
89CR 01537-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,, (aka)1D
90CR 01308-RICHARDSON,HAL,G, (aka)1D
96LA019246-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1D
96LA000348-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1D
97CV000960-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1D
97LA011585-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,2D
08SC000096-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1P
05C 001464-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,TRACT 76, (aka)133D
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,GEORGE, (aka)1OR
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,GEORGE, (aka)2OE
97CV000778-RICHARDSON,HAL,GEORGE,JR,

2 p.

95cr 00836 dv against dombrowski conviction

7 p.

12-1-1997 Joan Hamilton DA Refuses to Prosecute Admitted CrowBar Assault

4 p.

1995 DV 95CR836 Mary Kelly PSI Not Good Candidate for RECOMMEND PRISON for Criminal conviction of CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI

4 p.

1995 DV 95CR836 Mary Kelly PSI Not Good Candiate for Probation_2

2 p.

1999_2nd ABP Heartland Consult an Tans Hal Richardson

3 p.

1996 Alternatives to Battering Per Domestic Violence Conviction against Claudine Dombroeski and Order of Probation Hal Richardson…

1 p.

1995 PSI Mary Kelly Recommends Prison for Hal Richardson as Conviction History of Violence past 15 years

5 p.

1995 ABP Records Hal Richardson CR Conviction of Domestic Violence to Claudine Dombrowski (HE WAS KICKED OUT!)

2 p.

1990 SARP Alcohol Drug TX Hal Richardson From Conviction on Battery of Law Enforcement Officer

2 p.

1995-Feb 21 D.A. Affidavit for Domestic Violence (Conviction) Case No. 94-CR…

3 p.

1997 Closed Camera Inspection of 30 Day Drug Alchohol Hal Richardson Aug_1

KS: Child Custody Case Managers, ONE of the Most Scrutinized in the Judiciary - Appointed to "high-conflict" divorces - KS Legislature and KS Court of Appeals, taking steps to ‘Rein In’ the “Quasi-Judicial” RENEGADE appointees

http://cjonline.com/news/2012-07-09/courts-working-guidelines-case-managers#comment-596328

Excellent article by Andy Marso and the Topeka capital Journal. You have to go to the article and read the comments.

Courts working on guidelines for case managers

Excerpts:

“mediation and other alternative dispute resolution in the Kansas court system says it will seek public comment soon on new guidelines for child custody case managers, who are fast becoming one of the most scrutinized aspects of the judiciary.”

“public comments on case management could be solicited as soon as this summer and the comment period should last months”

“followed by appellate court decisions in back-to-back weeks that slapped the Douglas County district court for abdicating too much of its authority in custody cases to the case manager.”

“Two weeks ago, the appellate court found that Karen Williams was entitled to a full evidentiary hearing on the district court's decision to reverse custody of her daughter — a decision that was made solely on the recommendation of case manager Cheryl Powers.”

“The latest appellate decision, released Friday, established that father Matthew Merrill had the right to object to all recommendations of his case manager, Patrick Nichols, and that the judge should review those objections before implementing the recommendations.”

“Bud Dale, a Topeka-based lawyer and case manager, agreed, and said he also thought the appellate judges went too far in limiting case management fees.”

“Dale objected to the judges' ruling that Nichols shouldn’t have been able to bill Merrill for the time Nichols spent defending himself against motions to remove him as case manager. Instead, the court wrote that case managers are only authorized to asses fees to the parties for work related to "custody, residency or visitation or parenting time issues."

"(The court) muddied some waters here," Dale said. "I'm not in indentured service to the court. I'm not working for nothing."

“In the Merrill case, the appellate court also found Nichols was inappropriately influenced by the parties' unwillingness to pay him and the district judge erred in accepting Nichols' request that his recommendations be immediately implemented as court orders”

Read rest of article here: http://cjonline.com/news/2012-07-09/courts-working-guidelines-case-managers#comment-596328

My comment:

Blood for Profit - Just US, no one else. After 18 years of hell in Shawnee County Courts, Case management, GAL’s, parent coordinators and other 3rd party 'access to justice interferer’s’, have shown their true agenda - theirs -

and the commenter' s here are 'on to them' and the whole 'therapeutic jurisprudence' – b.s. w 2 degrees. Dr. Bud Dale, JD. Your ‘gravy train’ (and all the others) is finally at stake.

Awesome job to cj and Andy Marso, more than awesome job that after all these years I finally see the people – we the people – outraged! I have waited almost two decades for the truth to finally burst out. Thank you Topeka.

LAW is LAW - psych is theory, ideas, opinion. Not fact. There is absolutely no place in a Court of Law for any ‘therapeutic jurisprudence’ – Self (financially) ‘made-up' positions that amount to ‘crystal ball’ reading’s. Take it on the road w the carnival. Entertainment [bad entertainment] is better than the damage caused by your so called JUDGE/GOD idea, opinions and your beliefs. People divorce for a reason - stupidity, danger and insanity in forcing them into polar situations for financial gain is inhumane.

Dr. Bud Dale states …

…."(The court) muddied some waters here," Dale said. "I'm not in indentured service to the court. I'm not working for nothing."

Indentured slave? Case managers and other www.WhoresOfTheCourt.comhave no problem ‘enslaving’ families for personal profit... get out Bud.

Reevaluating the Evaluators: Rethinking the Assumptions of Therapeutic Jurisprudence in the Family Courts http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/child-custody-evaluations.html

Bud Dale Does Case Management:

“Teaching Battered Mother to NOT complain about abuse, if she ever wanted to see her child again.'’ Mother never did see her child, she was never allowed to mother her daughter and a little girl denied her mother - 15 years later-- still no more than strangers, thanks KS Case Mangers, Courts and Bud Dale. $$ -
You murdered innocence, you rewarded violence -- An entire generation sent to slaughter for your personal $$ gain.

See Kansas case leads Petition To Inter American Commission On Human Rights http://bit.ly/b0EgEQ
Yes, that’s me, just another ‘high conflict’ case that case managers made careers out of.

--Dr. Dale Case Manager Report to Court in the Claudine Dombrowski Case;

“…..forcing a battered mother to not complain about sexual and physical abuse - it’s confrontational, and if mommy wants to see child again……then mommy will do as told.” http://bit.ly/JT

Karma baby. The ultimate justice. And they all came tumbling down....

KS Appeals Court: ‘Mother entitled to full custody hearing’ – After Case Manager reverses Child Custody from Mother to Father…..Ya think? Really? In a Court of Law? Damn this just gets more and more interesting all the time……

“The bottom line is, that case managers and others have NO BUSINESS at all – in the family courts, it is an oxymoron to have the Court of Appeals rule that a ‘law’ should be followed, when the most basic of all law is due process.”

Related: http://cjonline.com/news/2012-06-22/case-manager-oversight-still-murky

I cried when I heard the news below, for many reasons.

 

1. I always think of my daughter Rikki, had this been law would it have changed what happened to her and I? For 6 years we fought for a hearing after a now JUDGE, LLOYD C. SWARTZ (had been case manager) severed all contact between this mother and her child. It was not until 2010 that there was finally a hearing on it – SIX years later, although for 6 years this mother wrote motion after motion for hearing….. judge after judge it went through, never to be heard, never any of the basic fundamental rights of ‘due process’…..

And; when that hearing did finally come, the GAL (M. Jill Dykes) with the court appointed ‘psychs’ (David C. Rodeheffer) had taken over where the case manager (Lloyd C. Swartz) had left off….

Justice still remained denied, mother and daughter remained without contact as the abuser father (Hal Richardson) maintained complete control.

2. Even though, there will now be ‘hearings’ on the perversion of    justice - (where again - none should be) - the ‘house of gold’ has become brighter by other profiteers such as BUD DALE – GAL’s and other third party access to justice interferers.

I cry. Nothing has changed except for the Increase in profits from the other child traffickers.

There will only be Justice – when Justice is allowed. There can never be justice, when Therapeutic Jurisprudence is allowed.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence: The Trial Within a Trial http://bit.ly/a2yslz

 

The bottom line is, that case managers and others have NO BUSINESS at all – in the family courts, it is an oxymoron to have the Court of Appeals rule that a ‘law’ should be followed, when the most basic of all law is due process.

##

KS Appeals Court: Mother entitled to full custody hearing. Lower court had reversed custody on case manager's recommendation

http://cjonline.com/news/2012-06-29/appeals-court-mother-entitled-full-custody-hearing

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

The Kansas Court of Appeals ruled Friday that a mother who lost residential custody of her child based on a case manager's recommendation is entitled to a full evidentiary hearing.

Karen Williams, formerly Karen Wray, became an outspoken proponent of the need to reform the state's child custody case management system after the lower court limited her to once-a-week visits with her daughter without giving Williams an opportunity to hear and respond to the case manager's recommendation.

In a decision written by Judge Karen Arnold-Burger, the three appeals judges noted that the laws establishing case management do not explicitly require a hearing on case manager recommendations, but parents have a right to due process under the 14th Amendment when a fundamental liberty like the custody of their children is at stake.

"Although this holding may result in courts having busier dockets," the decision states, "the information received at such a hearing will aid the courts in deciding whether the case manager's recommendations are in the best interests of the child and insure that due process, one of the most sacred and essential constitutional guarantees, is provided to the parties."

The three appeals court judges found that case manager recommendations that change legal custody or residential custody, or significantly change parenting time warrant a full hearing if they are contested.

"The court of appeals nailed it," said Bud Dale a Topeka lawyer and case manager who submitted an amicus brief in the case. "In terms of the clarifications needed in the law to function as a case manager, the court of appeals decision was perfect."

The judges sent Williams' case back to the Douglas County court where it originated for a full hearing.

Williams called the decision "such a relief," though she said she was disappointed the appeals court did not grant her request to remove the case manager and district court judge who appointed her. Williams may face the same judge when she has her hearing in Douglas County, but she said she's confident she can regain residential custody of her daughter.

"I know that once we're allowed to present evidence, there's no way you can look at this and say that what has happened is righteous and fair," Williams said. "That's what I wanted is to be given the opportunity to present it and they're giving us that opportunity."

The Legislature authorized the judicial branch to appoint case managers to negotiate visitation in "high-conflict" divorces a little more than a decade ago. Since then, parents and lawyers have expressed concern that case managers have broad authority and little accountability.

Ron Nelson, a Lenexa family law attorney who represented one of the parties in a similar case that went to the appeals court in 2000, called Friday's ruling "a very good decision." Nelson said it goes farther than any previous ruling in establishing that the court is the final authority on child custody changes, not the court-appointed case manager.

"This decision certainly pulls back from what seemed to be the way that case management approvals were going," Nelson said. "Which was that they were rubber-stamped, either in a hearing or out of a hearing."

Williams says that's what happened in her case.

Williams' daughter was born in 2001, and she filed for divorce from the girl's father a year later. The two retained joint legal custody, but Williams had residential custody and her ex-husband had weekly visits. That arrangement held until February 2011, when Williams told the case manager, Cheryl Powers, that she was remarrying and moving to Marion.

In response, Powers recommended that the court reverse the custody arrangement. According to the court decision, Powers believed Williams had a history of alienating her daughter from the child's father and "this alienation would only increase if she were allowed to move away with the child."

Within a month, the court adopted Powers' recommendation and denied Williams' request for a full hearing. The court also ignored Williams' request that it remove Powers as case manager and appoint a guardian ad litem for the child.

That led Williams to appeal to the higher court, which was unusually caustic in its evaluation of Powers' response to Williams' request for her removal.

"The tone and content of Powers' subsequent response to Wray's objection can hardly be described as a professional report from a neutral factfinder or facilitator," the judges wrote.

"You don't see that kind of language very often," Nelson said. "Saying it's essentially an unprofessional recommendation and reaction is kind of strong language."

The Legislature moved to address some of the concerns about case managers last session by requiring they hold a professional license. But legislators decided to wait and see how the court would rule in Williams' case before taking further action.

Dale said he will propose a minor procedural fix next session, but the court addressed most of his concerns. Nelson said there's still work for legislators to do.

"This (decision) certainly helps and provides some solace that case management is not quite the railroading it's been perceived to be," Nelson said. "But there still needs to be more standards and more direction from the Legislature than this opinion really gives."