Bangkok has some special thoughts on Chris Ambrose. I respond to his precocious views.
Frank, please look at me when I’m talking to you. Don’t look at your shoes. Look me in the eye, Sir.
Sir, I was looking down because I began to smirk at your whiteface and putty nose. Not to speak of that hunk of suppurating tissue off your dorsal appendage.
You claim your ‘goal’ of writing these Chris Ambrose articles is to get Ambrose to begin granting Karen Riordan visitation rights and/or custody rights. But you’re lying to your readers, Frank.
No intelligent person would honestly expect Ambrose to change his mind — and begin granting visitation. The reason is you keep trashing him with repetitive articles that essentially say the same thing.
You do NOT expect him to ever do that. That is NOT your ‘goal’ of writing these articles.
Chris Ambrose is unhappy with the Frank Report. His children are unhappy with him. The carrot and stick approach (to changing somebody’s behavior) only works if you HOLD SOMETHING BACK and do not unload everything in your arsenal against them.
But you’ve already unloaded your entire arsenal against Ambrose many times over, which means he’s got NO INCENTIVE to try and please you.
Because even if you stopped writing negative articles about him —– you’ve already got a dozen negative articles about Ambrose indexed in Google for eternity. This means there’s no VALUE/REWARD for ceasing these articles.
Thus, even though your first articles initially perturbed Ambrose (and he sent you an email with toothless legal threats) —- you’ve lost the ability to hurt Ambrose any longer. There’s nothing left you can ‘expose’ about him.
But wait, Sir, I have more in my arsenal for Mr. Ambrose.
Your true ‘goal’ is NOT to win custody for Karen anymore. Your true ‘goal’ is simply to attack Ambrose to satisfy your own need to ‘win’ these juvenile mud-fights. It’s like two kids arguing on a playground or two pigs fighting in the mud.
I disagree. I want the children to be with their mother. It is not about Chris or even Karen. I want the children to have some say about who they want to be with.
It is not a battle between Chris and me. The war would end in two minutes if he did not abuse his children. I am not interested in fighting him.
The difference between your insulting comments, and mine, is that I rarely repeat the same insults about the same person, over and over, ad nauseam.
The media won’t ever jump on this story now — since it’s too juvenile between you two.
Don’t be too sure about that, Bangkok. There must be some kind of justice for these children.
Let’s not forget the “Nickola” issue —— which you have yet to apologize for or even discuss with your readers. LOL.
I am sorry for Nickola. But one cannot blame Karen or the children. Nickola went to a hearing. The purpose was the disqualification of Judge Gerard Adelman.
Cunha decided to allege Adelman was Jewish, and all other actors involved in taking the mother out of the children’s lives were Jewish, and Adelman favored them because they were Jewish.
I have no idea if all of them are Jewish. I don’t know. Or care.
I am, however, ready to allege that all the bad actors who stole a mother from three Hispanic children happen to be white.
Nancy Aldrich, Jocelyn Hurwitz, Jessica Biren-Caverly, Judge Jane Grossman, Chris Ambrose, Judge Gerard Adelman, Bill Horn, and Karen’s duplicitous and/or incompetent lawyer Rich Callahan and the rapacious Edward Nusbaum.
All white. If I point that out, does that make me a racist?
Attorney Edward ‘Golden Fleecer’ Nusbaum [above and below] appears to work for the wealthy parent, no matter who he claims to represent.
‘Show me your net worth, and I’ll tell you who is the better parent.’ This is the legal philosophy of Edward Nusbaum.
What if I add that the only person who treated the children with compassion and fairness was a Hispanic – Judge Eddie Rodriguez?
Judge Eddie Rodriguez Jr. granted primary custody to the mother.
Then the others got together and robbed the children by switching judges to Grossman.
As for Cunha, I do not think she is an anti-Semite. But she hurt her client’s case with her statements. And most importantly, the children are hurt. They continue to suffer.
Ambrose is the father, and it’s his decision how to raise his kids.
That’s what’s wrong. The children have a mother, and she has been excluded because he has the money he stole from her. And could pay these bad actors.
It does not matter if they are white or what religion they believe in. The children’s voices are not being heard. They are 15, 15, and 12.
They should have some voice in their lives.
You’re a blogger, not the father, so I’m not sure how your opinion should outrank a FATHER’s wishes.
Dammit, Bangkok, I’m a reporter, not a parental alienation adherent. But I know common sense. Removing a mother from children’s lives is not what is best for the children.
Even Dr. McCoy would know enough not to remove a mother from children’s lives when there is no allegation of abuse or misconduct.
The only allegation against Karen is that she allegedly shared her negative view of the loathsome Chris Ambrose with her children.
Even if it were true, why do the children have to be punished? What if she did say bad things about Ambrose, and what if they were true? Should the children be punished?
Karen says she did not say bad things about Ambrose. I have plenty of evidence that he went out of his way to set up parental alienation against Karen by making himself despicable and odious to the children. They naturally did not want to see him. He blamed Karen, and his paid bad actors supported it because he had the money to pay them.
The children have repeatedly tried to get their mother in their lives.
Keep in mind that Karen raised them every day of their lives.
All their lives until two years ago, Karen raised the children as a single mother. When Ambrose got caught plagiarizing and had to return home, he set it up to remove Karen from the children’s lives.
The kids don’t get to decide how they’re raised by making social media posts—for the SAME REASON that kids don’t get to decide if they want to eat candy all day or party until the sun comes up, even though many of them want to do those things.
Wanting to eat candy all day and wanting their mother who raised them every day of their lives is not the same. Children should have a say in that. These children are 15, 15, and 12. When do they get their mother back?
Speaking of social media, the children were so alarmed by their father’s conduct and interests that they posted some of his photos from his phone on Pinterest to get help.
He seems to enjoy forced haircuts
He trolls men pretending to be a barber.
No one says an adult man should not view what he likes in adult porn, but he should not share it with his children.
However, I get a little alarmed when the father of three Latino children visits websites like this.
And when he views videos of boys getting their heads shaved, you gotta wonder about that infallible court, which knows better than their mother.
Let’s change gears now…
With all your righteous mud-slinging — you still have YET to prove the most important factor in the Connecticut Family Court debacle. You have yet to prove how THE JUDGE benefited from this alleged sale of children.
He’s not being paid by any of the parties.
How do you know that, Sir?
To be part of this conspiracy, you need to PROVE with evidence what he’s receiving in return for aiding this alleged ‘sale of children.’
You keep telling us that it’s wrong for the FBI to charge people without EVIDENCE (not just theories) — yet you seem to have no problem alleging criminal conduct to OTHERS, without evidence, whenever it suits you.
You seem to think it’s okay to allege ‘crimes’ (with nothing but one-sided testimony) — yet you scream “FOUL PLAY” when the FBI does that to others, including yourself. Don’t be a hypocrite.
If you don’t have the GOODS on the judge —– then he’s not part of this conspiracy.
And if the JUDGE is not part of this conspiracy, there can be NO CONSPIRACY —- since it only works if the judge is involved, as he’s the ultimate decision-maker.
I am not alleging the judges are part of a paid conspiracy, though perhaps they are. They can gain in other ways.
The Keith Raniere trial showed Allison Mack was part of sex trafficking because she gained social status by trafficking Nicole to Keith Raniere. She was not paid money. But Mack got something of value.
I have reported that Judge Jane Grossman sought reappointment as a judge. Ambrose’s attorney, Nancy Aldrich, has a son, a CT state senator. He sits on the judiciary committee. The judiciary committee recommends which judges get reappointed. The state senators vote to confirm their reappointment. Senator Haskell was especially important, since he is the senator for the district where Judge Grossman sits. The local senator gets deference for the judges in his district.
One of Judge Grossman’s best friends, Judge Jane Emons, did not get reappointed because she used parental alienation to rob children of their mothers one too many times.
People put billboards up complaining about her destruction of families. And her use of parental alienation.
The CT State Senate did not reappoint Emons.
Judge Grossman stole more mothers from their children’s lives for affluent fathers than Judge Emons ever thought of doing.
Judge Grossman faced a hell of a hard time.
Aldrich knew which judge her son, the senator, could be the most helpful to Judge Grossman.
Ambrose was also facing a hell of a time.
Judge Eddie Rodriguez had ruled Karen should have primary custody, and Ambrose should file a financial affidavit showing what he did with Karen’s money. If the case stayed with Judge Rodriquez, it was obvious where it was going.
Ambrose would have to give Karen half of the money he stole back. He would not get primary custody and probably have to pay child support and maybe alimony to Karen.
Aldrich arranged to transfer the case to Judge Grossman, who needed her son’s vote.
Judge Grossman dutifully ruled that Ambrose should have sole custody of the children. She flipped custody without ever hearing from the mother or the children.
But unlike Judge Rodriquez, who let the father see his children, Judge Grossman denied the children any contact with their mother.
Also, unlike Judge Rodriguez, who required Ambrose to account for the money he took, Judge Grossman did not feel it was important. She let Ambrose control the money. All the better to pay her friend Aldrich.
So one day, the children were happy in their lifetime home with their mother, and the next day they were removed and told they could never return or even talk to their mother.
Can you imagine the trauma these children have undergone?
But most adults were made happy.
Ambrose paid Aldrich around $500,000 for her legal services. He got to keep his wife’s share of the marital assets – about $1 million.
In turn, Aldrich’s son, Senator Will Haskell, made Grossman happy. He supported Grossman’s reappointment the following year.
I do not think Judge Grossman got cash for robbing these children of their mother. But she did get something of value. Everyone got to eat candy all day, except the children and their mother.
A loving parent would walk through FIRE to partially reunite with their kids again.
Karen proposed over twenty names of friends and former teachers to act as supervisor of the visits. Ambrose was given veto power and denied them all.
Ambrose and GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz selected the supervisor, Lisa Kerin. At the cost of $400 per hour. He paid her the first payment of $7500.
By the terms of the supervised visits, Karen could not see the reports and could not video tape the visitation sessions. GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz and Judge Jane Grossman would be the only ones to see the reports.
She had to sign forms which treated her like a criminal.
Karen did not believe the supervised visits as a way to reunite with her children. She saw it as a setup to keep her permanently away. And there was never a court hearing about why parental supervision was required.
If you truly love your kids more than anything in the world — then you’d agree to STOP BADMOUTHING the father and be a loving parent.
That is so true of the father. If he truly loved his kids, he would stop preventing them from seeing their mother.
No fit or loving parent would refuse to STOP doing this —– to regain partial custody.
She did not refuse to stop doing it. She did not do it. I have reams of evidence to show she wanted the children to have a good relationship with their father. Ambrose is mentally unstable, but smart enough to game the system.
But Karen is obviously not a loving parent, since she REFUSED to do this.
Ditto times 1000 for Ambrose, for he is actually preventing – he alone – the children from seeing their mother. The court is not stopping him. The case is over. He has custody – at least for now.
That means he could decide tomorrow to let the children see their mother. There is no prohibition. No court order. The case is over.
You’re just not impartial here, Frank.
Bangkok, you’re just not human here. You have no heart for the children. You want this to be adult-centric. The suffering of the children is meaningless to you.
You seem to be friends with Karen, and you cannot even acknowledge these things.
I am friends with all who wish to have compassion. The children are lonely, isolated, and traumatized. I wish I could tell all I know. It will all come out soon, I believe.
As for your comment, which said: “How can we trust the courts, if they might be wrong?”
Well, the courts are what society has decided to trust in such matters ———, since the alternative is to trust firebrand bloggers who have virtually no legal experience and a past record of trusting lawyers like Nickola as sources. LOL.
I’ll trust the courts over your own OPINIONS any day of the week.
I trust the children.
According to you, Nickola was not mentally ill and was a pure truth-teller.
I never took a position on Nickola being mentally well or not. I believe she told the court she had mental and/or physical health issues that caused her to say what she did that day.
You have JUDGEMENT issues, Frank. Your judgment is not as ‘foolproof’ as you’d have us believe. You’re just as human as I am, Frank. Have a good day.
No, Bangkok, you cannot join the human race just by living on this planet for a while. Back home, out there in zero gravity, with your wonky smile, long delicate fingers, and tentacles stretching involuntarily during the night, you may fool your own.
On your planet, they know nothing about how children might love their mother and not love their abusive asshole father.
But these children are from earth, so they need their mother. And anyone who can’t fathom that is not human at all. That includes their father.
Dammit, Bangkok, I’m a human blogger, not an inhuman monster that can ignore the cries of these children to go home – to their mother.
Go back to your microwave-emitting star, where mother-child love is unknown. May a million light years keep you and these children apart. And for God’s sake, take Ambrose with you.