By Nickola Cunha
For those who accuse me of anti-Semitism, you’re 100% wrong.
I believe in equality across the board. I would have pointed the same concern out for any favoritism I felt was occurring in any courtroom.
When a litigant is subject to a written decision that wrongly states the facts, filled with findings that ignore the law, rules of practice and common sense, this is a public crisis.
Attorney Nickola Cunha claimed Judge Gerard Adelman was biased. She got disbarred.
I feel strongly and defend my reporting of the concerns.
As a human being and citizen of CT and the USA, I have the right to expect and be guaranteed that my human rights and those of my clients are not ignored or purposefully violated.
I’m not perfect and never held myself out to be. But I have always vigorously represented every client, regardless of the legal matter. It’s very easy for anyone to Monday morning quarterback. Critiquing and poking holes in someone else’s work is always easy.
I knew what was occurring. Judge Adelman treated me and my client, and her witnesses, with bias and disrespect. I’ve tried many cases in many areas of law. I appeared before many family court judges, some of whom I admire and respect.
This was judicial bias.
Judge Lynda B. Munro
One of my hardest trials was before Judge Lynda Munro. I admired her knowledge of the law, her adherence to the law, and the respect she extended to all in her courtroom, equally, even though the case involved horrendous evidence she had to sit through.
It was my first complex family law trial.
The attorneys in that case were far more experienced than I in dealing with the complex nature of the case. I stood my ground, worked day and night to try and keep up with the other attorneys. They were not easy on me, and sometimes they didn’t appreciate the way I handled things. I admire and respect them to this day. They taught me a lot, and as hard as that trial was, it was rewarding to me as a professional.
Over 20 years have passed between my first complex family trial at the regional court and the matter that ultimately ended my career that I love, and worked hard to be the best I could be.
I witnessed and was subject to what I believe is unacceptable judicial bias. In Ambrose v Riordan, I believe the case was filled with downright judicial abuse.
It was my ethical obligation to report what I believe were serious concerns. I found it hypocritical and a direct conflict that when I reported and directed the court to evidence to support my concerns, I was retaliated against. I was noticed for a hearing to show cause for my alleged conduct in front of the court.
While trying to prepare for the hearing to show cause, I was denied access to the record to prepare. I was treated with the utmost disrespect. I was ambushed with allegations by disciplinary counsel with no advance notice, and denied the opportunity to offer any evidence.
My matter is subject to a pending writ of error. Therefore, I’m going to hold back on specific details. What I will repeat is, unless someone has reviewed the entire record, and the full exhibits offered to the court before I was summarily disbarred, they are not qualified to make valid criticism.
I will end with this:
From my perspective, there are no winners or losers in family court. I believe in the commitment of marriage. I believe the more people – family first, then friends and community involved with raising children, the better. This is in the children’s best interest. I don’t believe any parent should use their children for gain.
I believe that no matter what a person’s status or age, whether a litigant or otherwise, when they contact a public official with information that rises to the need for investigation, that should happen based on the standards and laws those officials are supposed to follow. That did not occur in the Ambrose case, and does not occur in many so-called complex family matters.
So I offer this as food for thought: Maybe the concern in the Ambrose case was that the ones participating in bias, and financially benefiting from this case, had to ensure I was gone before I put my client’s case on.
Karen Riordan and Chris Ambrose. Ambrose put on his case. When it came time for Riordan to put on her case, Judge Adelman ordered a hearing on his own bias.
At the hearing on Judge Adelman’s bias, Judge Thomas Moukawsher decided he wanted another hearing on attorney Nickola Cunha’s conduct. At that hearing, he disbarred Cunha.
In CT, unlike other states, a judge can summarily disbar an attorney.
The consequences of this case reached beyond the family unit. It’s a tragedy for the state. What happened to the mother, Karen Riordan, the three children, their extended maternal family, their lifelong friends and the community, cannot be remedied. However, it can be used to learn and work towards helping those harmed recover.
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
Lawyers in The New Haven Legal Assistance Association drafted a 22-page motion for Mr. Ambrose. A footnote in the motion says: “A draft of these motion papers was prepared with the help of an attorney in the Federal Pro Se Legal Assistance Program at New Haven Legal Assistance Association.“
Given the subject matter and the implications of the potential outcome of the case, how many Connecticut attorneys want the Ambrose case moved from the district court back to the state courts and why?
No attorneys filed their appearance in the case. None are listed as Mr. Ambrose’s representatives in any of the filings so there’s no way to know for sure.
Is the public allowed to know whether or not attorneys with conflicts of interest helped write the motions? Investigations noted on this site named many who might now want to hide the specifics of their involvement.
Since a few lawyers and judges might eventually be implicated, all lawyers and judges involved in any way in any of the many cases should probably declare all potential and actual conflicts of interest before the case proceeds.
By the way, it says on the top of the motion: “JAN 17 2023 PM12:50 FILED-USDC-CT -t IEW _HA!. irn”
“HA!.” must be code for something or an adolescent exclamation.
If a state court judge can summarily disbar an attorney in the state and attorneys working on cases can remain anonymous to hide collusion and conflicts of interest, maybe “HA!.” is code for intentional fraud on the court.
Does the public have a right to know if David Reif, President of the Board of Directors at New Haven Legal Assistance Association helped someone help Mr. Ambrose with electronic discovery matters?
Information online says James “Jim” D. Horwitz is on the boards of Greater Bridgeport Bar Association and New Haven Legal Assistance. So many are on that board and so many are “friends of the board”. So many in the legal field know so many others.
Would it be surprising if Jim Horwitz knows Gerard Adelman or Robert Holzberg at Pullman and Comley? Information online says Attorney Horwitz lectured on the subject of, “Offensive and Defensive Use of Daubert Motions: Successfully Utilizing Daubert as a Sword or Shield”.
Some reading this might know: the Daubert and Frye standards are legal standards very often used to defend and protect families from family court vendors who use junk science such as “parental alienation syndrome” to destroy families for profit.
If Jim Horwitz helped Mr. Ambrose’s at New Haven Legal Assistance Association and if he’s related to Robert Horowitz (they do look a lot alike in online photos) do those conflicts of interest need to be declared in some way?
Gerard Adelman, former director of CT AFCC, Inc., passed cases to Robert Horwitz, CT AFCC, Inc. member and Bruce Freedman, CT AFCC, Inc. Treasurer, for profit — with judicial authority. Those are federal crimes and fraud upon the court has no statute of limitation.
How many court-ordered billable hours did CT AFCC, Inc. member Judge Lynda Munro order — and could John Doroghazi at The New Haven Legal Assistance Association be in the process of preparing to defend CT AFCC Inc members if and when RICO charges are filed?
The above might sound far-fetched. Maybe it was just a few young interns from Yale helped Mr. Ambrose draft his 22-page motion. Maybe a random licensed attorney who knows nothing about corruption in Connecticut family courts glanced quickly at the 22-page draft and okayed it. If that’s all that happened, maybe it’s nothing to be concerned about.
Either way, does the public have a right to know?
“When I left their law offices I suspected that they had probably already written the document, were not terribly interested in what I had to say and were meeting with me as a pro forma exercise.”
— another victim of the same Connecticut cabal
From Cassandra Day, The Middletown Press, September 3, 2019:
“Among ‘Best Lawyers in America,’ retired Middletown judge man of integrity, ‘emotional intelligence’
MIDDLETOWN — Sharing a birthday with the 16th president of the United States was the spark that led retired Superior Court judge Robert L. Holzberg into the practice of law decades ago.
The 67-year-old leads the alternative dispute resolution practice at Hartford-based firm Pullman & Comley, which he joined six years ago. Holzberg, who was born Feb. 12, as was the country’s 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, knew since the start of high school that he wanted to make a career in the field.
“Every job I’ve had is the best job I’ve ever had. I’ve been blessed and fortunate. I’ve had a love affair with every job I’ve had the honor to serve in. What has given me the greatest satisfaction is helping people,” said Holzberg, just named to the 2020 list of the Best Lawyers in America.
Holzberg, who left the bench seven years ago Sept. 1, earned the distinction for the fifth year in a row. The Middletown native’s long and distinguished career has focused on arbitration and mediation …
… “He has extraordinary emotional intelligence. He understands people. And while very intellectually bright, he also has compassion and common sense,” said retired Judge Lynda B. Munro, who worked with Holzberg while both presided over Superior Court at Middletown.
… Holzberg was appointed to the Superior Court in 1990 by Gov. William O’Neill, and served as the presiding judge for civil matters in the Middlesex, New Britain and Waterbury judicial districts. (Sidney Horowitz’s office: Waterbury)
… “The legal system is an invaluable asset in a democratic society because it allows us to resolve our disputes peacefully and peaceably,” Holzberg added.
… “He stands out as remarkable,” according to Munro, who worked with Holzberg during his time on the bench in Middletown and now is a member of the Pullman & Comley firm. Holzberg, she said, epitomizes the Yiddish word “mensch” — “a person of great quality.” When it came time for Munro to retire, knowing Holzberg would be there at the firm to guide her if necessary convinced her to accept the job. “He works hard every day to try to connect well with people, understanding he has a very important duty to make them understand what the law provides for or does not,” Munro said …”
Lynda Munro, Sidney Horowitz and Maureen Murphy celebrated birthday parties and family gatherings together. How many personal connections did Robert Holzberg, Lynda Munro, Sidney Horowitz and Maureen Murphy fully disclose in family court hearings?
Eli Newberger, M.D. is “a leading figure in the movement to improve the protection and care of children, is renowned for his ability to bring together good sense and science on the main issues of family life. A pediatrician and author of many influential works on child abuse, he teaches at Harvard Medical School and founded the Child Protection Team and the Family Development Program at Children’s Hospital in Boston.”
See Dr. Newberger’s testimony about Maureen Murphy offered to the The Connecticut General Assembly Judiciary Committee February 22, 2012:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/CommDocTmy.asp?comm_code=JUD&date=02/22/2012
From Aine Nistiophain, The Washington Times blog, March 1, 2013:
“GALS’ LEGAL IMMUNITY PERMANENTLY DESTROYS FAMILIES”
“… Dr. Horowitz and Dr. Kenneth Robson often conduct the court’s free GAL certification trainings together with Judge Munro. Court records show that when Dr. Kenneth Robson and Dr. Horowitz are involved in taxpayer-funded child custody cases, the parents are often ordered to not communicate with their children about any and all incidents involving any kind of trauma. The court-appointed GALs communicate directly with Dr. Horowitz about the childrens’ care. The GAL is the only one allowed to speak with the children about the litigation….“
Robert Holzberg’s opinion about The Catholic Church is a lot like Cos Cob Elementary School’s Assistant Principal Jeremy Boland’s opinion of Catholics in Connecticut.
Mr. Holzberg’s report about Catholic priests sexually assaulting children reads a lot like the many bogus family court opinions he and his friends wrote for the past several years. In Mr. Holzberg’s opinion, the Mother church is to blame for the Fathers’ sexual abuse of the children.
From The Connecticut Diocese of Bridgeport Press Release, October 3, 2018:
“Bishop Frank J. Caggiano today (October 3) announced that retired Connecticut Superior Court Judge Robert L. Holzberg, who is a partner in the law firm of Pullman & Comley LLC of Hartford and Bridgeport, will serve as counsel and lead investigator for the Clerical Sexual Abuse Accountability Investigation being conducted for the Diocese of Bridgeport …”
Note: Given the behavior of the cabal in control of family courts, the following statement should concern every Catholic:
“… As part of his investigation, Holzberg, a Middletown resident, will have complete and unrestricted access to all Diocesan files, records and archives dating from 1953, when the Diocese was founded, to the present, and the opportunity to interview Diocesan clergy and administrators with information relevant to his inquiry.”
What has Mr. Holzberg, his friends and acquaintances done so far with that information — and what could they do?
Footnote on page 47 of Mr. Holzberg’s report:
“… In many cases the so-called “psychiatric examination” was nothing more than a perfunctory interview with a non- credentialed “therapist.” In the case of Father Charles Carr, Monsignor Cusack referred Father Carr to a William Larkin, who held a degree in theology. Purportedly relying on Larkin’s recommendation, of which there is no written record, Msgr. Cusack transferred Father Carr to a new assignment. And in those cases in which a more thorough and comprehensive evaluation recommended caution, that recommendation was often ignored. After yet another complaint against Father Carr and referral to the Institute of Living, the evaluating psychiatrist recommended that the diocese undertake “administrative action to protect both Fr. Carr and the public.” That suggestion was ignored. April 9, 1990 letter from Howard G. Iger, M.D., Director, The Retreat at The Institute of Living, to The Reverend Laurence R. Bronkiewicz, S.T.D. …”
Here’s Monsignor Bronkiewicz’s righteous response to what Mr. Holzberg did:
“Bishop Caggiano and Mrs. McCrory:
On October 1, at a Bridgeport press conference, you announced the release of a Report prepared by a local law firm but which was bought, paid for and approved by you, with the assistance of Mrs. Ann McCrory, your legal counsel. In the interest of truth and the transparency you’ve always claimed for yourself, please stop calling it the Holzberg Report. It is the Caggiano Report.
Now, normally people have to wait until after death to be canonized, but you and the current Archbishop of Baltimore found a way to attain saintly status right here and now, and I’m far from being alone among God’s People to have noticed that.
Unfortunately the Caggiano Report and your press conference accomplished their objective by “throwing me under the bus” as the saying goes, and “me” includes my good name and reputation which has taken me a lifetime to build with God’s help.
All of your Report’s other victims (who are not among the credibly accused) are your dead episcopal predecessors and my own deceased predecessor as Vicar for Clergy. Perhaps you didn’t notice, but they were already dead – you did not have to drive the bus over them and their reputations, and what you did to them has not registered on the applause meter! As for this living Caggiano abuse victim (and you’ll notice I’m copying Ms. Erin Neil, your victim outreach coordinator), I decided not to walk quietly into the night after October 1, and with the Holy Spirit’s guidance I found the strength to compose this email.
Allow me now to offer some additional comments –
Until the afternoon of September 30, neither you nor Mrs. McCrory ever told me that my name would appear in the Caggiano Report. When she did call in the late afternoon, she rather nervously indicated that I appear in 3 or 4 places, but as I soon discovered, it’s actually 11 places (pp. 4, 40, 57, 58, 61, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, and 70).
Given the Diocesan posts I’ve held, including Episcopal Vicar for Clergy, Chancellor and Diocesan Administrator, is it unreasonable of me to have expected to to be informed that I am in the Report, how many times, and to have been given the opportunity to read it and react to it before its release? People I’ve spoken with think it would have been quite reasonable.
– to the best of my recollection, during my 3.5 hour interview with the Holzberg Team, at no point did Holzberg or the other lawyer ask me about the material referring to me in the Report. Frankly I find that highly unprofessional especially in light of the Report’s cost. If I’m mistaken and they did, I would insist on seeing their notes. Furthermore never did I receive any documents or questions prior to the interview to help me prepare for it. Bear in mind that my Diocesan work with these cases, from 1986-2002, was not exactly recent. I am also particularly concerned about 2 of your Report’s references to me:
– p. 67 – Had I been asked about Castaldo, I would have answered that my very serious concern about him never disappeared, but why was the person who mistakenly claimed that I wasn’t concerned never identified ?
– p. 68 – Had I been asked about that Federici case, I would have clearly denied making that statement to the mother of the young boy, nor did I ever say to her or any other alleged victim or relative that I would refuse a letter or that a complaint would not be kept but destroyed
– my disappointment in the unprofessional process used by the Holzberg Team with respect to me goes deep, and when
I left their law offices I suspected that they had probably already written the document, were not terribly interested in what I had to say and were meeting with me as a pro forma exercise.
While you can never undo the impact that the Caggiano Report and the surrounding media coverage have had on my life and will continue to have, I think you, Mrs. McCrory and the Holzberg Team can try. Here are my two reasonable requests:
1. a letter of apology from you to me which would would appear in the Fairfield County Catholic and on our Diocesan Website and would be distributed to every Parish and Diocesan institution; as you can undoubtedly imagine I am particularly concerned about my former Parish in Ridgefield as well as Saint Thomas More, Darien, where I’ve been helping out
2. a letter of apology from the Holzberg Team, who were/are employed by you, for their unprofessional interview of me which, as I said, did not touch upon any of the 11 references to me in your Report.
Since, unlike yourself, I do not have the benefit of calling a press conference to help restore my good name to the extent possible, I will be forwarding this letter to many friends and others and hope that you will feel free to distribute it to your Secret Clergy Abuse Advisory Board (another example of your transparency?) as well as your so-called Healing Committee, and any other person or persons.
In closing my I express the very serious hope that you will never do to another priest, deacon or layperson in this or any other Diocese what you have done to me.
— Msgr. Larry Bronkiewicz, Ordained July 2, 1973 and still serving God’s People”
Attorney Nickola Cunha was right.
In this joyful season, may Christians celebrate the birth of Our Lord and His flipping of the tables.
Did Jonas (James) Lawrence write Dissipation of the Darkness: History of the Origin of Freemasonry?
Is this true?
“… It is clear here that the goal of ancient Masonry was solely the preservation of the Jewish religion.
The new Masonry, that is, after the year 1717, tripled its goal: one part (the Jews) preserved the ancient principles ; the second group embraced the principles of Desaguliers, that is, to attack Catholicism ; and the third group adopts the principles of naturalism and nihilism …”
https://archive.org/details/pdfy-GnQmFCGkr56h9LYT/page/n1/mode/2up
Which individuals allowed corruption in Connecticut family courts for the past 40 years?
Why have Connecticut mainstream news outlets been complicit?
Why did family court judges disbar a family law attorney who attempted to expose corruption in family courts?
Does Ultra Literary intend to publish a book to tell the world what’s been happening in those buildings without windows — or do they intend to “shoot a messenger”?
September 2019
Yfat Reiss Gendell is Executive Producer for A&E television movie, “Escaping the NXIVM Cult”
September 2020
Rachel Deahl, Publishers Weekly: The co-founders of Foundry Literary + Media are launching new ventures. Yfat Reiss Gendell and Peter McGuigan, who started the full service firm 13 years ago, are amicably parting ways to create their own agencies: YRG Partners and Ultra Literary
January 2021
Rachel Deahl, Publishers Weekly: “Peter McGuigan, the cofounder of Foundry Literary + Media, has filed a lawsuit against his former business partner, Yfat Reiss Gendell. The suit, filed on Friday in New York’s Supreme Court, claims that Gendell stole money from the former partners’ literary agency …
… The complaint alleges that, between January 16, 2020 and November 25, Gendell withdrew $634,277.50 from Foundry’s operating account without McGuigan’s knowledge. The withdrawals, the suit alleges, were for Gendell’s personal use, “thus defrauding the company of hundreds of thousands of dollars.” The lawsuit also states that Gendell withdrew at least $187,245.72 more from the operating account, last fall, to fund her new agency.”
December 2022
After a young woman described human trafficking and Freemasonic rituals in Connecticut for over a year, she recently posted a video showing an Ultra Literary book bag and wrote: “I’ve got the most amazing team of powerful women helping me take down the elite pedophiles that trafficked me and that prey on children. I’ve known my whole life I was meant to be an author, and to liberate myself through this book has been the greatest journey of my life. Receiving justice is about never being silenced again, and exposing the injustices of our system and the people it protects. This is for all the children who have been silenced by their abusers….it’s our time now. #traffickingawareness #survivor #booktok ”
The Trail Went Cold – Episode 50 – Kevin Showalter:
“Christmas Eve, 1973. New London, Connecticut. While changing a tire, 20-year old Kevin Showalter is struck by a passing vehicle and killed in a hit-and-run. When the local police botch the investigation and make no effort to solve the case, Kevin’s mother is forced to fight for answers on her own. Years later, a grand jury investigation is launched and the town’s former mayor is named as the probable driver of the vehicle. However, further complications ensue when another man comes forward and confesses to the crime, creating debate about who was actually responsible for Kevin’s death.
This week’s episode of “The Trail Went Cold” will be examining what is perhaps the most extensive and controversial hit-and-run case in the history of the United States, which has still not found a conclusive resolution after four decades.”
“Does the “fraternity” of Masons that adds 4,000 years to every year also control the state with blackmail?”
Nope.
“A BRIT journalist says Jeffrey Epstein threatened to put a demonic spell on her unborn twin sons.
Vicky Ward, 52, also claims he repeatedly quizzed her on what she knew about his relationships with young girls.
And she says he wanted female staff to parade in Prada bikinis.
Vanity Fair interviewer Ms Ward recorded her chats with sex predator Epstein in 2002.
She says she lost the tapes but has a 450-page transcript of their calls which she has got actors to read for podcast Chasing Ghislaine.
Ms Ward said: “Epstein was a thug, who soon told me he had a dossier on my then-husband and me.
“He said he could get us fired. He threatened to sue me. Strangest of all, he threatened a hex on my unborn children.
“He warned me: “I know all the doctors in this town.”
She says the stress of dealing with him led to her twins being two months premature. …”
https://www.the-sun.com/news/3259587/journalist-epstein-demonic-spell-babies/
If anyone needs proof that Cunha is a thief (eyes looking at Frank) here is a full report that showed she took $5000 from a client and did nothing. The client finally got new counsel who helped them file an emergency custody order that was granted and she refused to give the money given to her as a retainer back. So Frank, I’m curious if you stick up for people and families clearly hurt by Cunha….
https://jud.ct.gov/sgc/decisions/21-0336.pdf
The Complainant retained the Respondent on September 18, 2020 to represent her in a post-
. judgment custody matter. The Complainant and the Respondent signed a fee agreement on that date,
and the Complainant provided the Respondent with a $5,000.00 retainer at that time. Over the next
three months, the Complainant sent frequent text messages to the Respondent, seeking legal advice
and asking that action be taken in the court matter. The Respondent failed to reply to many contact
attempts by the Complainant, and failed to provide definitive legal advice. While the Respondent
replied on occasion to the Complainant’s texts, suggesting potential courses of action and promising
to file various motions, the Respondent never provided any definitive guidance as to what actions
should be taken. The Respondent never filed any motions with the court.
In January of 2021, the Complainant retained successor counsel in the matter. Successor
counsel filed an emergency ex parte motion for custody, which was granted by the Court
I’d like to hear Nickola’s side of it
They wanted to as well. She refused. They found her guilty and yet you won’t rush to judgement on Cunha but you will rush to judgement if it’s someone who Cunha is opposing? What a hypocrite.
Like Chris Ambrose?
Hey Cunha!
You told the court you were saving up for a mental evaluation….how is that going? So when you get in front of the Judge you plead the fifth and tell everyone your coco for coco puffs but here in the warm embrace of Frank your all fight.
https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/Disbarred-CT-attorney-who-accused-judge-of-17221922.php
Cunha’s lawyer, Norm Pattis, claimed in a hearing Monday afternoon that his client is suffering from a mental health condition that has interfered with her ability to execute the judge’s orders.
“Her behavior is out of character,” Pattis said told the judge. “I’m not sure she is capable of assisting in her own defense.”
Pattis said he and her family members believe that her mental health is the reason Cunha has not complied with court orders. Pattis also said allegations that his Cunha improperly withdrew client funds could turn into first-degree larceny charges so she would plead the Fifth Amendment if she were asked any questions during Monday’s hearing.
>norm pattis
lmao birds of a feather as they say
Nicely said. Both are interested in justice. Money is not the first consideration, as it is with most other lawyers. Children are important to them.
is that why he represented Jones in the sandy hook case? for the good of the children?
Norm Pattis could do nothing for the late lamented children. Every defendant is entitled to zealous representation.
the ones that survived, frank. The ones retraumatized every time jones opens his mouth.
It’s a civil case, so the defendant is not entitled to anything. I’m sure that norm, ethical man he is, was not the only lawyer in connecticut Jones could have paid off.
Norm Patti’s is a criminal defense and civil rights attorney. He is not running around under the color of law pretending to be representing the best interest of the minors in the state. There is plenty of people complaining about the family court system in Connecticut. Everyone is getting derailed and hung up on the common religion of some..
your talking about the lawyer representing Alex Jones! yeah, Norm really cares about the children of CT…..hahahahaha
Chris Ambrose would have taken Alex Jones as a client when he practiced law. I’m taking no position in that case, but there is a First Amendment issue, if I am not mistaken.
Isn’t it going to be appealed?
No, Alex Jones lost. its over.
There is no appeal?
No first amendment issue, just process abuse and a default judgement.
Norm couldn’t care less about the children of Connecticut and the worst part about that is: Most people have no idea.
Cunha is mentally ill frank. She said it herself. You seem to be almost ignoring it like a child with his fingers in their ears. She said she is crazy. But your too scared to say she is? Why?
The taunt of a child “you’re too scared, Frank.” And you’re supposed to be a psychiatrist.
Is ‘crazy’ a term of art?
Cunha is clearly batshit crazy.
Frank knows I’m a big fan of his. He can detect a liar from a million miles away, but when it comes to schizophrenic psychos, he doesn’t know his ass from his elbow. I wanna yell from the rooftops, “Franky get’a fuck’n clue she’s a crazy bitch!”
Re Karen’s Kids:
I feel so badly for Karen Riordan’s children. It’s difficult to read this series of articles. It’ very depressing stuff to read. Hopefully the Frank can help get her story get to the public.
It’s one of the hardest, saddest, most eye-opening stories I have ever encountered. Three happy children wrested from their mother and plunged into grief with a cold-hearted father whose only interest is money and winning. And the best line of all, the Guardian ad Litem, Jocelyn Hurwitz, wrote to Karen to the effect, “sure the kids were unhappy about losing their mother, but they’ll adjust.”
At least get your article correct. Cunha is no longer appealing her disbarment. It was dismissed.
Perhaps you will be good enough to show me some proof of that.
You suck at your job….
Here it is:
http://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentDisplayer.aspx?AppId=2&DocId=J3ZwXQfn4qka5zIR8HbWww%3d%3d
You’re a lawyer Chris. I’m not. But I believe she is still actively pursuing reversing the unfair and outrageous bench disbarment. Please respond.
She tried to appeal the ruling and it was denied. There is nothing left for her to do. She will tell people she is fighting it but she isnt. Amazing, you cant help but believe anything Cunha says without proof but anything she tells you about other people MUST be true.
The abuse of Mia, Matthew, Sawyer is the ‘will of the people’ of Connecticut, acting thru elected leaders, in exercise of democracy, only Nutmegs themselves are to blame for allowing such child abuse while enriching the chosen ones.
Now let’s have the facts. Quote:
Cunha had alleged that she had evidence, including a list of cases in which Adelman had inappropriately favored Jewish people, but, when asked at a hearing, failed to produce any such information and admitted she did not have such a list
“This is a matter about a lawyer. When lawyers speak, the public rightly assumes they don’t speak lightly. After all, the truth is their business. Therefore Ms. Cunha’s lies about a Jewish conspiracy are particularly reprehensible. Without the court exposing them as lies, the public might give them some credit when they deserve none,” said Moukawsher. “Misconduct like this threatens to drag the courts into the primordial ooze that passes for public discourse in some quarters today”
https://www.nhregister.com/metro/article/Hamden-attorney-disbarred-after-empty-and-16813376.php
Sausage,
What would you say you know for sure about corruption in Connecticut family courts?
What if Attorney Cunha files a motion to request a hearing to present evidence of corruption in Connecticut family courts?
She could write in her request:
“All we’re seeking is an evidentiary hearing. Nobody wants to see a government changing evidence in manipulating evidence, even against people who they don’t like. So we’re hoping that the whole truth will come out and then courts can make the proper judgment.”
https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/alan-dershowitz-nxivm-keith-rainier/2022/12/08/id/1099696/
“So we’re hoping that the whole truth will come out”
That is the most wishy-washy wording ever
Aren’t anonymous insults even more wishy-washy than that?
Bottom line Cunha wasn’t representing her client. She should be disbarred for that alone.
She even said she apologized to her client for her conduct and rambling allegations and conclusions.
She failed those children. Rusher Cunha but bring justice to these children.
It’s tough for any attorney with a conscience to represent a client with a conscience in front of judges such as Mr. Adelman — especially wherever opposing attorneys, guardians ad litem, evaluators, governors, state attorney generals’ offices and mainstream news organizations are on the same political team as the judge.
Wherever the courts are rigged for politics, law isn’t law. It’s politics.
Wherever judges can decide that it’s totally okay for a father of teenage girls to pose online as a hyper-sexualized teenage girl, the court is rigged for politics. Wherever judges firmly believe in the right of a father to pretend to be a barber online in order to lure young men (and/or minors who look like young men) the court is rigged for politics.
What some call “The Left“ has worked for decades to destroy all that’s good and decent. This year and next years seems to be their grand finale. “The Christmas Drag Queen Show” is on a national tour. If they’re in the area, perverted parents who want full custody of children should buy tickets. The more conservative parents object, the more inclined Connecticut family courts will be to flip custody to the parents with the tickets to the show.
This past August, Project Veritas released a video showing Cos Cob Elementary School’s Assistant Principal saying:
“Believe it or not, the open-minded, more progressive teachers are actually more savvy about delivering a Democratic message without really ever having to mention politics.”
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/exposed-greenwich-ct-assistant-principals-hiring-discrimination-ensures/
More from the article:
“… Boland: “So, it’s subtle. They [teachers I hire] will never say, ‘Oh, this is [a] liberal or a Democratic way of doing this.’ They’ll just make that the norm — and this is how we handle things, it’s subtle…That’s how you get away with it.”
Boland: “The conservative [teacher], who is stuck in her ways. I’ll never be able to fire her, and I’ll never be able to change her. So, I make an impact with the next teacher I hire.”
Boland: “Protestants in this area [of Connecticut] are probably the most liberal. But if they’re Catholic — conservative…You don’t hire them.”
(Note: Attorney Nickola Cunha is Catholic.)
Boland: “If someone is raised hardcore Catholic, it’s like, they’re brainwashed — you can never change their mindset.”
Boland: “For one position, I think we had 30 applicants. So out of all those applicants, I don’t think I interviewed anybody over the [age] of 30…the older you get, the more set in your ways — the more conservative you get.” …”
(Note: Attorney Nickola Cunha is over the age of 30.)
Here’s an article about what happened next:
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/james-okeefe-announces-connecticut-attorney-general-has-threatened-project/
“… After a Project Veritas investigation into Cos Cob Assistant Principal, Jeremy Boland, attracted local and national news, O’Connell sent Project Veritas a letter on September 2nd stating that the Attorney General’s Office had “opened a civil rights investigation into the possibility of discriminatory employment practices in the Greenwich Public Schools.”
The letter then states that his office anticipates “issuing subpoenas for relevant material,” adding that if the investigation “substantiates a pattern or practice of illegal conduct, we may initiate appropriate litigation to enforce federal and state law.”
In a response, Project Veritas Attorneys, Paul Calli and Charles Short, noted a few problems with O’Connell’s approach, first being that “At the federal level, before a prosecutor or agent may attempt to speak or serve process on a journalist to obtain any materials or information from the journalist, permission must first be granted by the Attorney General of the Unites States.”
More from Calli and Short’s letter:
“Protection from Compelled Disclosure of Information Obtained by News Media” law found in Section 52- 146t of the Connecticut General Statutes (the ‘Shield Law’). If you have read the Shield Law, you know it expressly prohibits the action your letter threatens to take against Project Veritas. Specifically, subsection (b) of the Shield Law provides that ‘No judicial, executive or legislative body with the power to issue a subpoena or other compulsory process’ – that means you – ‘may compel the news media’ – that means Project Veritas – ‘to produce or otherwise disclose any information obtained or received . . . by the news media in its capacity in gathering, receiving or processing information for potential communication to the public…’ Connecticut’s Shield Law requires in subsections (c) to (e) that after negotiating with Project Veritas but prior to issuing your threatened subpoena you first make a showing by clear and convincing evidence that: (1) ‘There are reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has occurred;’ (2) The information you seek from Project Veritas is ‘critical or necessary to the investigation;’ (3) The information ‘is not obtainable from any alternative source;’ and (4) ‘there is an overriding public interest in the disclosure.’
Attorneys for Project Veritas further noted that the letter from the Connecticut Attorney General’s office “neither cites this law, purports to have complied with this law, nor frankly evidences even cursory knowledge of this law.”
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/james-okeefe-announces-connecticut-attorney-general-has-threatened-project/
Read Ambrose’s bs lawsuits. All fabricated claims. Lives in a world of delusion. Had paid gal and attorneys to fuel his bs but then stiffs his own attorney. What a guy.
And if anyone from Westport refuses to see Ambrose it’s because we know who he is. And no good father does this to children. They love their mother. She’s a great mom. We never got to testify.
Stop blaming everyone when you’re choosing to kill off their mother. You are one scary fuck.
The commentary about Judge Lynda B. Munro is off point. Munro resigned from the bench in disgrace, she was target of corruption investigation, and realized it was time to exit rather than lose a pension, and be charged. Munro is a monster. Her twisted application of law led to the McGaffin case in 1984, which gutted parental rights in Connecticut… another [redacted] invention. Note the decision in McGaffin still holds in CT, in defiance of SCOTUS case law in Troxel. See how the [redacted] have CT wired, parents are fucked, family savings is bar feed, Bill of Rights does not apply, legislature is bought and paid for, people are sheeple, welcome to life in the gulag.
McGaffin: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9038012233184783940&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47
Troxel: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10935528927815644277&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p65
Hi Christie,
Did you or anyone find information about an FBI investigation of the Connecticut family courts?
Some parents who were victims of CT AFCC, Inc. gave the FBI evidence 2014-2015 and weren’t told what the FBI did with the information after that.
Ms. Munro did step down from the bench in 2014 “for personal reasons” and Mr. Adelman stepped down as “Director” of CT AFCC, Inc. after a state judicial committee published minutes from a committee meeting on the Connecticut Judicial website. According to the minutes, the committee decided that an individual associated with an unnamed organization with the same description and characteristics of CT AFCC, Inc. shouldn’t have been doing what that unnamed person was doing. The committee noted several broken laws/rules/standards of practice.
Who allowed Mr. Adelman to be a judge after he stepped down as “Director of AFCC, Inc.”?
Who allows him to still give lucrative court-ordered high-conflict cases to his associates now, just as he did as “The Director of CT AFCC, Inc.”?
Most of the content available to the public regarding Attorney Cunha’s case seems to indicate she knew she was poking a hornet’s nest when she raised the sensitive topic of corruption, but she trusted Judge Moukawsher and the system to do the right thing.
It looks like Judge Moukawsher knows there are many big hornets’ nests and secrets in the state and for that reason, he immediately took the focus off of Mr. Adelman to shine the brightest, most narrow spotlight possible on Attorney Cunha’s irrelevant comments. Head hornets in Connecticut must have known how many secrets about Connecticut family courts Attorney Nickola Cunha would have eventually found had they not silenced her, embarrassed her and threatened her. After a few weeks, they organized an effort to destroy her as much as they could and somehow, out of all the cases in Connecticut courts, her case was the only case that deserved national headlines.
If FBI good agents didn’t investigate Connecticut family courts in 2014-2015, good FBI agents should investigate Connecticut family courts now and keep an eye on “Overcoming Barriers, Inc.”
After New York’s AG told Keith Raniere to stop the multi-level marketing ventures, Keith boldly engaged in all those ventures anyway — for the next 20 years.
If the FBI did investigate CT AFFC, Inc. in 2014-2015 … and if they told Ms. Munro she had to step down from the bench and stop her CT AFCC, Inc. family court ventures … what happens now if Overcoming Barriers, Inc. is simply a mirror image of AFCC, Inc., using some of the same people under a different company name while working with AFCC, Inc. chapters?
Minnesota AFCC, Inc. members invited Overcoming Barriers, Inc. to their July 28-29, 2022 Annual Conference “to share skills and strategies gleaned over the years providing intensive interventions with these families”.
How many years of gleaning was it? Current records show Connecticut AFCC first incorporated in 2013, but CT AFCC, Inc. members have connections in Minnesota going back to the 1980s. The AFCC website says: “The Minnesota Chapter formed in 2008 and is a vibrant organization that continues to grow.” Okay. 2008.
The Bizapedia website says: “Association Of Family Conciliation Courts is a Minnesota Non-Profit Corporation (Foreign) filed on December 21, 1981. The company’s filing status is listed as Active and its File Number is 21270.” Was the AFCC Minnesota chapter formed in 1981 or 2008?
Meanwhile, in Connecticut, “Association Of Family Conciliation Courts, Inc. is a Connecticut Domestic Non-Profit Corporation filed on January 29, 1982. The company’s filing status is listed as Withdrawn and its File Number is 0126858. The Registered Agent on file for this company is Secretary Of State. The company’s mailing address is 1720 Emerson St, Denver, CO 80218.
[The address for Connecticut AFCC: 1720 Emerson St, Denver, CO 80218? Did Jessica Pearson register the Connecticut company with her address in Colorado?]
Company Name: ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS, INC.
Entity Type: CONNECTICUT DOMESTIC NON-PROFIT CORPORATION
File Number: 0126858
Filing State: Connecticut (CT)
Domestic State: Illinois (IL)
Filing Status: Withdrawn
Filing Date: January 29, 1982
Company Age: 40 Years, 11 Months
Registered Agent: Secretary Of State
Mailing Address:
Map Icon spacer 1720 Emerson St
Denver, CO 80218
Governing Agency: Connecticut Secretary of State
Why Connecticut, Illinois and Colorado?
According to OpenCorporates:
CONNECTICUT CHAPTER OF AFCC, INC. incorporated in 2013 and dissolved in 2015. Did CT AFCC, Inc. register as a corporation in 1982 or 2013? Did a state/federal office order CT AFCC, Inc. to dissolve in 2015?
Company Number 1097500
Status: Dissolved
Incorporation Date: 26 March 2013 (over 9 years ago)
Dissolution Date: 13 May 2015
Company Type: Non-Stock
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (US)
Recent filings:
13 May 2015: DISSOLUTION
Certificate of Dissolution: 6 May 2015
ANNUAL REPORT: 26 Mar 2013
Certificate of Incorporation: 26 Mar 2013
Here are a few theories about why AFCC formed and what it set out to do:
When AFCC organized and established offices in various states in the 1980s, Richard Gardner happened to be touring the nation and the world to teach family law attorneys and vendors how to use the “Parental Alienation Syndrome” scam.
Important to note:
Outside of Richard Gardner’s scam, the phrase “parental alienation” usually describes separation of parents from children, separation of children from parents, unjustified and harmful estrangement of family members and sometimes criminal behavior that led to total loss of contact or the weakening of family relationships.
In cases involving the Richard Gardner scam, “parental alienation” is a label the abusive parent uses. The abusive parent threatens the safety of the children and abuses them emotionally, physically and/or sexually. The protecting parent responds to that abuse of the children the way most parents respond: to protect the children. That’s the point at which the abusive parent/attorney/guardian ad litem/evaluator tells the court the protecting parent is “alienating” the children. It’s a set-up.
Difficult as it is for the public to believe, that junk science often flips custody of abused children to the sexually/physically/emotionally abusive parent. The “Parental Alienation Syndrome” Richard Gardner referenced and promoted in family courts isn’t alienation. It’s a sinister trap.
After forty years of family court lawyer/vendor networks using it all over the world, it’s been a multi-trilllion dollar industry that has destroyed millions of children and families all over the world. Forty years ago, Richard Gardner’s yearly national and international itinerary was extensive.
Alfred Kinsey’s Nazi research (look it up) contributed to ALI Model Penal Code changes in the 1950s – 1960s. Criminal law once used to protect children and families was weakened and some criminal codes were eventually eliminated. Punishment for rape in family matters was replaced with “therapeutic jurisprudence”. In the 1980s, evaluators and therapists handled or mishandled child sexual abuse cases however they chose. There was virtually no oversight for the “therapy” provided in family courts in the 1980s — just as there’s virtually no oversight for the “therapy” provided in Connecticut family courts today. Many family court lawyers, guardians ad litem, therapists and evaluators still use Richard Gardner’s “Threat Therapy” in childhood sexual abuse cases.
Who is Jessica Pearson, Director of the Center for Policy Research at 1720 Emerson St., Denver, Colo. 80218?
Why did the Administration of Children, Youth and Families of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services chose Jessica Pearson and AFCC to receive federal grants since the 1980s? How and why has the state of Connecticut judicial branch pushed children and families down such a destructive path for the past 40 years?
Can no one share the secrets of Connecticut family courts because the crimes committed have been so egregious? As long as no one shares the secrets of Connecticut family courts, how much longer will Connecticut children and families suffer in the state family courts?
What is the Research Unit of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts? After 40 years of state and federally funded “research”, why does the Connecticut family court system still arrange for “families entrenched in conflict” to be forced through purposely adversarial for-profit services provided by the same networks of vendors in companies such as AFCC, Inc. and Overcoming Barriers, Inc.?
40 years is a long time to get it right and yet, after 40 years of federal and state grants and research, family law attorneys in the state charge $750 an hour to have distressed parents sign bogus contracts forbidding all discovery in arbitration? Did Jessica Pearson or someone else decide discovery isn’t essential in the practice of family law?
Do brain surgeons make $750 an hour?
With the first sign of childhood sexual abuse, those cases should be immediately sent OUT of the for-profit purposely adversarial system. Why aren’t they?
Childhood sexual abuse cases belong in the criminal justice system. Free (taxpayer funded or privately funded) evidence-based trauma informed care should be offered and available. Why isn’t it?
Why are Connecticut family courts not protecting children after 40 years of federal and state grants and research?
“High-conflict” cases in family courts mean high profit when vendors can take money from families via family court orders. Most family court attorney and vendor contracts are about money. Look at most any family court lawyer or vendor contract. You will see no mention of guaranteed protection for the children. No mention of attempted protection for the emotional, physical and financial health of children and parents in such vulnerable and sometimes devastating circumstances.
Did Ms. Munro step down from the bench in 2014 to “network” with AFCC, Inc. members and her Overcoming Barriers, Inc. charity? This is from the Overcoming Barriers “charity” website:
“Lynda B. Munro, Connecticut Superior Court Judge (Ret.) … retired in 2014 after 20 years of distinguished service on the Connecticut bench. She served as Chief Administrative Judge for Family Matters from 2008-2013 and Presiding Judge of the Regional Family Docket for seven years … Overcoming Barriers ran its innovative High-Conflict Family Camps annually since 2008, working with families entrenched in conflict who primarily were court ordered to attend …”
Families are “court ordered” to attend. Parents pay $20,000 for 6 days of Ms. Munro and friends’ OCB “Family Camp”.
From the “Overcoming Barriers charity” website:
“You must have a court order to proceed with intake and for attendance at camp … The fee for intake is $1,000 per family and is nonrefundable … Tuition for a family of up to four: Five (5) percent of the parents’ combined income from all sources, including but not limited to, taxable, nontaxable, earned, unearned, trust income and consistent and predictable gift income. Total fee for camp shall not exceed $20,000 … Families must pay for their own travel expenses. The cost of travel is not included in the camp fees.“
After parents provided such detailed financial information to attend OCB “family camp”, the parents and children provided personal information to OCB for the following 6 days. How was that information used? How many OCB members and family court vendors saw trust funds associated with conflicts and used that information to provide “services” in their “networks” via court-ordered engagement with AFCC, Inc. and Overcoming Barriers, Inc. members and associates?
Which professional or government offices provided oversight for the Overcoming Barriers, Inc./AFCC, Inc. charities?
From the “Overcoming Barriers charity” website:
“The Overcoming Barriers program team continued to refine and adapt the Family Camp program and in 2018 and 2019 included modifications based on feedback from campers, its own observations and experience, as well as input from program evaluations conducted over the past four (4) years.“
That could mean the only oversight provided to make sure OCB and affiliates didn’t fleece children and families was:
The Overcoming Barriers program team
feedback from campers
its own observations and experience
input from program evaluations
Which “program evaluations were done”? Why would such a distinguished group leave out details about who provided the “input from program evaluations”?
What happened next:
“CAMP NO MORE….
To that end the gradual changes in OCB’s focus from a direct service to a training organization have led us to the conclusion that Family Camp is no longer a service that meets our mission and vision … OCB, best known for its original signature Family Camp program, has evolved and grown into an educational and training organization, providing resources such as online courses and publications for families, and family law professionals.”
Did the $20,000 a week OCB Family Camp close because of COVID-19 or conflicts of interest?
According to the Overcoming Barriers, Inc. “charity” they now offer:
“Professional development and training
Education to advance the field of knowledge
Awareness of innovative approaches for these families
Effective and accessible family-centered programs”
There’s more:
“The brilliant minds associated with Overcoming Barriers from its founders to its current Board and Advisory Council … are the thought leaders in the field of Resist Refuse Family Dynamics. OCB, best known for its original signature Family Camp program, has evolved and grown into an educational and training organization, providing resources such as online courses and publications for families, and family law professionals.“
Overcoming Barriers, Inc. does the same thing Connecticut AFCC, Inc. did. Do the “brilliant minds associated with Overcoming Barriers” use some of the same methods the brilliant Keith Raniere used?
If, present and heard the hearing in real time, as I did, people blathering contrary to this attorney would quickly and wisely STFU. That Mushmouth was the one who put that conspiracy talk on the record. He, like most Connecticut judges, dwells with mediocre intelligence along with the “family” bar.
More of Cunha’s garbage
I have read all the records and files that are publicly available. Why isn’t Cunha talking about being charged for stealing money from her client trust account? This has been reported in the legitimate press but is never mentioned here.
Cunha says the other participants in the case had to get rid of her so she wouldn’t put on her case. Her client bailed before it was her turn to put on her case. She just stopped showing up on the Zoom. It was remote so she couldn’t blame expenses. Cunha makes it sound like Adelman interrupted the case so he could go after Cunha. Not true at all.
Cunha’s word is garbage. She needs to be called on it.
Only people who hate Cuna are the abusers who are called out
With exceptions like Riordan, Cunha’s clients are people of very modest means. This was apparent at one of her disciplinary hearings. Her stealing from them is just evil. She isn’t out to help anyone but herself.
I have seen zero proof of theft. Please provide it. Otherwise, it is libel.
Funny that you of all people are crying libel, Frank. :insert eyeroll:
Nothing about any of this is funny.
Is the “:insert eyeroll:” supposed to prove your point?
Here you go frank. A judgement because she stole $20K from BoA and refused to pay it back.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=18815168
And as a lawyer, here is the accusation by her client that Nickola stole from her:
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=24077491
Now I get it. ITs not absolute proof so you cant totally be sure. You say shit about all sorts of people because YOU KNOW but you wont assume the worst about Cunha until you see it singed and in triplicate. That’s not bias Frank…right…
It is very far from dispositive. But your bias is showing. I see no proof that a civil judgment by BOA is proof of theft. As for the client dispute, I would rather wait until it is resolved through due process. I can see some potential sloppiness for not having a retainer. But I smell some misconduct on the part of the court and trustees, and maybe opportunistic clients. Let’s wait and see.
It had been on zoom the entire case. Once Cunha was disbarred it was changed to an in person trial.
Malpractice?
Cunha’s lawyering in the Ambrose case was aggressive and pathetic. Why isn’t Riordan suing Cunha for malpractice? Don’t give me the Karen doesn’t have money crap. She has sued the Governor and AG and many others on her own. A big fat malpractice suit would bring Karen money which she says she needs.
The truth is Karen isn’t suing Cunha because she supports everything she has done.
Chris Ambrose’s behaviour in the case is child abuse. Chris proves he suffers from great mental defect, spending huge amounts of cash so Adelman can order reunification of the destroyed family. Aldrich, Hurwitz, Adelman, Grossman, Caverly … connect the dots. Who got all the cash?
How do you know she’s not going to sue Cunha?
Why did Adelman violate Jennifer’s law of coercive control? The wife had no access to marital bank accounts since the case began in 2019.
It’s in the transcripts. Ambrose admitted locking her out and keeping her inheritance. He’s a snake who paid everyone and locked his wife out of all accounts and the marital home. It’s totally unethical and all attorneys permitted it. Total scam- paid by Ambrose. Typical malignant narcissist.
Cunha continues to lie and obfuscate. Adelman’s reputation is for being too soft and too nice. He wasn’t disrespectful to anyone, including Cunha. He gave her 15 continuances without asking for proof of her 3rd grade excuses. She once tearfully told the court she had a dying family member. It turned out to be a pet. The point isn’t her feelings, it’s her misleading and manipulation. Cunha was disrespectful to everyone. She often called other lawyers and the GAL liar. She has faced the bar disciplinary board for doing the same thing in other cases. Riordan stopped showing up in court the day she was to take the stand. This was long before Cunha was disbarred. This is why Riordan didn’t present her case. She knew she’d get crushed.
Is there a single member of the family bar who is not a liar? Is there a single GAL who is honest? Trustworthy? Family court is a cesspool of deceit, promoted by judges and attorneys to extract the most money from parents, inflict the most harm to children, for the financial gain of the worst lawyers in the world. Racketeering under the color of state law, all for a NO FAULT divorce.
I absolutely agree
Thanks Mike. If only Judge Michael Albis would speak such truth to power. 😔
From the pathological liar at himself. The plagiarist. The closeted homosexual. 😂
The wife took the stand for days.
You can’t tell truth from fiction Christoper or is it Alwin or Alwyn?
Ambrose who trolls the internet hitting on guys, acting as a barber. But he makes himself a famous barber, in high demand who can’t reveal his name.
You’re 60 years old dude. Give the kids their mother. They hate you. Always have because kids know a liar.
Ambrose’s own attorney-Aldrich said Karen had only a day left and she was finishing up her case. What are you talking about Chris? More lies. Just like all your calls to the police. Full of lies. Using taxpayer money to have Madison cops protect your sorry ass.
And the Guilford cops too. Remember? You’re a joke.
You expect your wife to put on a case without counsel? When you are an attorney yourself? Kind of puts her at a disadvantage don’t you think?
But that par for the course when Karen married to an abuser.
Your kids know the deal. Everyone who knows you knows who you are. You’ve got no friends and no colleagues to support you. Never have.
Only money to pay off hired guns to steal your kids. You’re no father. They know it. We all do. I’ve seen it. You’re a coward. Remember me?
Yes we remember you. You are the one who was harassing and defaming the children’s father. You sound bitter bc you’re being sued essentially for your role as narcissist Karen’s flying monkey.
Chris, are you suing someone else now?
With all due respect, Attorney Cunha had the chance to take out one of the most blatant misogynists on the Connecticut Family Court and screwed it up. Adelman is demonstrably not biased towards Jewish litigants and attorneys. He is biased towards perpetrators of abuse, who are overwhelmingly male. And, regardless of Cunha’s personal feeling towards All Jews Everywhere, people will seize on a ridiculous claim because it discredits the argument. Enough is enough.
There is no law in Connecticut upholding isolation of children from a fit mother, so what is Adelman’s game? Not law. Of course it is his chosen ideology, sits in judgement over constitutionally protected mother-child bonds in pretense that it is ‘in best interest of child’, for which no case law supports Adelman’s chosen agenda.
when did I ever say adelman was acting in accordance with the law? He’s not.
His ideology is pro-abuser. Simple as.