Corrupt CT Family Court: Money-Driven Results Lead to Trafficked Children Deprived of Contact With Mother, Ambrose Case Set Again for Trial Before Judge Adelman

We intend to prove CT Family Court is a hotbed of child trafficking.

In the present case, there is a conspiracy by Judges Gerald Adelman, Jane Grossman, and Thomas Moukawsher; attorneys Nancy Aldrich, Jocelyn Hurwitz, Edward Nusbaum, William Brown and Richard Callahan; therapists Jessica Biren Caverly, William Horn, Robert Horwitz, Deborah Gruen and others – all of whom are wetting their beaks in the never-ending game of Connecticut Family Court – and selling children to the highest bidder, which means granting custody to the parent with money– usually the father.

In short, the child trafficking occurs with the movement of children for money – based on lawyers and therapists making money.

The usual plan is to set up a high conflict divorce case – where attorneys and therapists make money – and, with the judges’ complicity, hand exclusive custody [usually] to the father, leaving the mother and her children in a land of no contact.

What do the judges get? The support of the attorneys and therapists in their quest for reappointment and possibly other, under the table, benefits.

It is friends helping friends, associates doing what is necessary for all [except the children and mothers] to be happy.

Frank Report hopes to prove criminal intent and all the other elements of child trafficking and RICO, which is running rampant in Connecticut family court.

A good place to start is the remarkable, high-conflict divorce and custody case of former TV writer Chris Ambrose [“former” because he was fired for plagiarism] versus his wife, stay-at-home mother, Karen Riordan, [formerly a teacher with two masters’ degrees]. The case is back before the court of corrupt Judge Gerald Adelman – at 9:30 AM on Wednesday, February 16th, in Middletown, CT.

The judge previously ruled that the couple’s three children may not speak or see their mother. The father has the money.

In November, Judge Adelman, challenged by Riordan’s attorney, Nickola Cunha, for bias, called for a hearing over whether he should be recused, and a mistrial declared. It was a fancy set up to get rid of the pesky attorney.

Judge Thomas Moukawsher held a hearing to review the evidence of Adelman’s purported bias. Unsurprisingly, Judge Moukawsher found none. Moukawsher, however, decided that Cunha lied to him and disbarred her without a trial. That’s right: Moukawsher served as prosecutor, judge, and jury regarding Nikola Cunha’s right to practice law.

Cunha is no longer a licensed lawyer, her career shattered. Cunha is appealing Moukawsher’s heavy-handed, one-sided decision to protect his fellow judge by disbarring her.

This won’t end here.

Meantime, the mother, Karen Riordan, is without an attorney, as well as 46 other clients of Cunha’s in similar circumstances, many in the morass of notorious Connecticut Family Court, many of them mothers who had been cut off from their children by this same vicious, money-driven court. Cunha had taken on many cases where the Connecticut Family Court had awarded sole custody of children to well-heeled fathers.

Prior to the disbarment of Cunha, she repeatedly pressed for in-person court appearances in the trial of Ambrose versus Riordan.

Judge Adelman always decided to conduct them remotely. Today, however, Judge Adelman is – now that Riordan has no attorney – demanding the trial be conducted in person, requiring Riordan to appear, though she has no attorney, has no funds to hire an attorney, and has COVID.

She does not have money for food or travel either since Ambrose took control of all their marital assets prior to filing for divorce in 2019 and has not paid court-ordered monthly spousal payments since September 2021. [For the record – while Ambrose has blown through more than a million in marital assets, which, after all, should have been half her money, he has only made four spousal payments to Riordan. But the Connecticut Family Court follows the Golden Rule: i.e., Ambrose has the gold, so he rules.]

The most significant aspect of the case is the ongoing cruelty to the children, as the attorneys and therapists profit.

Please keep in mind that this gaggle of thieves – the therapists and the lawyers – handed custody to the father. Had they not done so, none of these ragged rascals would have made any money on this case.

If you don’t understand that, you will not understand why the children are being denied contact with their perfectly good and loving mother – much to their loneliness and despair.

If the mother got custody, the father would not have paid a dime to the attorneys and therapists. Since he, the unfit parent, has custody and the mother is fighting – he has to continue to pay – and pay – and pay.

Still, it is a bargain for him since he is using his wife’s share of the marital funds – and it will be cheaper than child support and alimony and splitting the marital assets.

Judge Adelman has continued an order initially issued by Judge Jane Grossman on April 24, 2020, that required the children’s mother to have no contact with her children for a limited time period.

But the isolation has, thus far, proved unlimited. To date, the children have been isolated from their mother for 663 days.

Judge Moukawsher took away Riordan’s lawyer. Judge Grossman took away her children and Judge Adelman is now commanding her to appear in person [This is the same Judge Adelman that never enforced his court order that Ambrose pay spousal support].

The justification for depriving children of their mother and placing them with their father – despite their wishes to the contrary – the children are 15, 15, and 11 and should obviously have a say in where they live – is a custody evaluation report by a psychologist known for findings that mirror whatever the Guardian ad Litem [who recommends her] wants, which in Connecticut means, following the Golden Rule, that whoever has more gold rules and the higher the conflict the more the gold and hand custody to the father with the money [unless the mother has money, then hand custody to her.].

Guardians ad litem [GALs] are attorneys paid by the hour. The more conflict, the more hours they bill.

In this case, the GAL is notorious Jocelyn Hurwitz of Cohen and Wolf.

In her custody evaluation, a report so flawed it is tantamount to malpractice and has been condemned by a peer’s review, Jessica Biren-Caverly, a psychologist, made a diagnosis that Riordan has an unspecified personality disorder [which does not exist in the DSM-V or anywhere].

There is no such disorder known to medical science, but it was enough for the court of Adelman and Grossman.

This was accepted by their court as dispositive – an unprincipled and dishonest custody evaluator, paid by the father, who decides without evidence that the mother has some kind of mental disorder – but cannot even specify what kind of disorder it is.

Caverly has no professional standing to make a medical diagnosis in the first place. She is not a psychiatrist but a psychologist. Not only that, Caverly was not providing therapy for Riordan but only met with her briefly as part of her custody evaluation.

Based on this, and the controversial practice of isolating children from one parent, based on “parental alienation,” the theory that if children prefer one parent over the other – even if their reasons are valid [like one parent is abusive], it means the other parent is alienating the children. It is a great tool for Connecticut Family Court’s child traffickers.

The remedy for parental alienation is to take children away from the parent they want to be with and place them exclusively with the parent they do not like. Nine times out of 10, parental alienation is employed to take children away from mothers and give them to [affluent] fathers, based on recommendations of the GAL and custody evaluators  – who are, as they were in this case, paid by the father.

In this case, the children made it clear they do not trust their father. After almost two years away from their mother – they continue to reach out to anyone, including this writer –  to say how their father is cruel to them and how often he lies; things he says that they know are untrue, have prompted them to call him “P” – which stands for Pinocchio.

They have posted on social media, crying out to the world that they miss their mother. Yet the cruelty continues. No contact with the mother by order of the court – supported by the GAL and the custody evaluator.

For no reason other than the influence of money – Ambrose has money because he took all the marital funds – more than $2 million – out of Riordan’s reach and paid for the custody evaluation and, to date, most of the GAL’s fees – the two women who recommended that he alone have custody of the children.

A woman who was a stay-at-home mother, who gave every day of her life to her children for more than 13 years, was outsmarted and deceived by a husband who used the corrupt Connecticut Family Court system, that sinister, awful den of injustice where money buys custody, and made his children miserable and his wife desolate of all she had known.

Now, Riordan has no attorney. She filed motions pro se to try to not lose her children forever in the court of Adelman.

By glancing at these, one sees how she is up against a stacked deck.

Ambrose has failed to disclose what he did with $2 million of the marital assets.

Riordan told the judge: “[Ambrose] has not disclosed the disposal of marital assets, children medical records, source of income, desires of the children, nor copies of financial statements.”.

Judge Adelman denied the motion, asking that Ambrose be honest and disclose what happened to the money, she rightfully owns half of. He ruled, “The alleged failure to disclose is a proper issue for cross examination.”

Riordan told the court she is suffering from COVID, preventing her from attending court in person.

Adelman ruled that she must submit medical documentation. “The lack of the attendance by the defendant [Riordan] may result in orders being issued without her testimony and evidence. As noted by the defendant in her own pleadings the custody issue must be resolved for the benefit of the three minor children.”

Riordan thought the judge, who denied the children of their mother, making such a brazen statement such as that he has the slightest concern about the children, children he has never met, was a mockery, an insult to justice.

She made a motion for the judge to rule on whether it is in the best interest of the children to be isolated from their mother, whether “662-day forced isolation of the children from mother and extended family is in their best interests.”

Judge Adelman denied the motion.

But the conflict prompted something novel. After three years of dodging any disclosure, Ambrose filed a financial affidavit, something required prior to trial. It contained a false statement, perhaps more than one, but the one which is provably false is that Ambrose claimed he was paying spousal support [coming from Riordan’s own marital money, which he covertly took prior to the commencement of the divorce proceedings.].

Karen filed  a notice of non compliance, perjury.

“Plaintiff has filed a perjured financial affidavit…  he states he is paying $1,038 a week in spousal support, which he has not paid since September 2021; he further states a weekly income of $571 against expenses of $4,558 a week, for which no source of funds is specified for paying such expenses.”

Adelman denied the motion, ruling, “The veracity of the plaintiff’s financial affidavit is properly developed by cross examination of the plaintiff.”

Riordan challenged the judge’s decision, making another motion concerning Ambrose’s perjury,  claiming that Ambrose’s financial affidavit is fraught with lies. Ambrose has been “concealing funding of… expenses [after all he claims he has $4500 plus in weekly expenses yet earns only $571 per week – meaning he is using the joint marital assets to pay his expenses – while not paying any spousal support to Riordan]  claims no payments from IRAs, while listing a joint account (Bruce Funds) for which [Riordan[] has no access, claims liabilities of $61k for [his attorney Nancy] Aldrich’s legal fees for which no invoices are disclosed nor in evidence with the court, he claims $73k GAL fees [for Hurwitz] which are not in evidence before the court.” {Hurwitz promptly filed her bill].

Adelman denied the motion.

The trial set to resume today puts Riordan at a severe disadvantage. After her attorney Cunha was disbarred, Riordan lost access to her own files. The disbarment order of Judge Moukawsher appointed a trustee to take over Cunha’s files and the trustee has not shared any of her files with Riordan.

Riordan filed another notice.

“The court appointed trustee, under orders from [Judge Thomas ] Moukawsher J, has tied up the undersigned’s files… claiming possession by order of Moukawsher.”

Judge Adelman said he would hear the matter of her not having the files at the trial today after she appears, even if she has COVID.

Frustrated, Riordan made a motion to disqualify Adelman, daring to use very direct language about the injustice she perceived. She accused him of “misconduct in failure to ensure proper disclosures of financial information [of Ambrose] …  Adelman’s game to proceed in trial for pointless, meritless litigation to argue over blatant lies in defendant’s FA [financial affidavit] demonstrates judicial bias & prejudice, lack of impartiality, instantly disqualifying the errant judge under Canon Rule 2.11…. Adelman’s lack of impartiality, unfaithfulness to the law, and blatant abandonment of office requires his disqualification by Canon.”

Adelman denied the motion.

Riordan challenged Adelman, seeking clarification writing “Broad discretion of the family court does not extend to voiding statutes by whim.”

Adelman granted the motion but put it off until after the trial is complete.

Karen challenged Adelman on his decision to wait until the end of trial.

“The court is asked to address constitutional principles which do not turn on competing opinions of errant judges, an unscrupulous court vendor [Hurwitz], or a vindictive father paying attorneys over a quarter of a million dollars for abuse of process.

Riordan also again notified the court that she cannot attend the trial in person since she has COVID, adding “If the court has legal necessity for medical documentation, a proper subpoena may issue and serve.”

Judge Adelman continued to demand medical proof of Riordan having COVID, writing “Medical documentation is required for the court to consider your request for a continuance. It is your request and your obligation to provide the necessary documentation. The defendant is reminded once again that her failure to appear will not delay the trial any longer.”

Jocelyn Hurwitz 

Meantime Hurwitz put in her bill  possibly to pressure the court to require payment from Riordan.

It was Hurwitz who was instrumental in depriving the children of their mother.  She has been paid $46,213.25 by Riordan, all of that being taken out of proceeds of the sale of the marital home, which was sold against her wishes. Ambrose has voluntarily paid Hurwitz $68,013.25 to date.

Now, Hurwitz seeks an additional $25,616.84 from Ambrose and $47,416.84 from Riordan.

At $93,629, Hurwitz wants a pretty penny from Riordan for recommending her children be taken from her.

In all fairness, Ambrose got the better deal. For the same amount of money as Riordan is being asked to pay, Ambrose got exclusive custody of his children – as recommended to the court by Hurwitz.

Stay tuned. There is much more to report on this story.