The Dark Side of Connecticut Family Court System; AFCC Members’ Conflict of Interest

Sunny Kelley is a typical CT Family Court divorce and custody case. When I say typical, I mean typical in CT.  She is the mother in family docket case FA09–4037658S Liberti v Liberti, now referenced as Doe v Roe on the judicial record. Here is her story in her own words. Later FR will explain the context of this narrative. 

By Sunny Kelley

My case began as what I thought would be an amicable divorce, even though my husband had chosen to commit violence against members of my family and me throughout the marriage.

When my son disclosed his father was touching his genitals and anal tearing appeared after a visit with his father, I sought medical attention and reported it to the authorities.

I expected a competent investigation would follow, and I would get some answers about what had happened or didn’t, and that if my son had been the victim of a crime, he would have, as all American crime victims are entitled to, protection from contact with the perpetrator.

What I didn’t know was that this would enter us into a black system where state agencies contract with each other to maximize Health and Human Services funding by increasing violent offenders’ access to their victims when the relationship is male parent and child.

Before the campaign of terror I’ve been enduring at the hands of judicial branch employees and professionals appointed to my case, I was a healthy, well-adjusted, productive member of society.

After my dealings with family court – more specifically, my forced patronage of an unethical corporation [The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Inc., or AFCC] where judges are in business with professionals who appear before them – I am left devastated, bereft, penniless, traumatized, and disabled with complex PTSD.

I am terrified for my child’s safety every single day. I fear for my safety every day. I want nothing more out of life than to have my son home with me, where he would be safe, and I can nurture him until his deep wounds, inflicted on him by AFCC judges who make rulings to satisfy funding mandates instead of law, can finally heal.

Financial Devastation Through Forced Dealing with AFCC Members and Affiliates

In total, my family and I have lost approximately one million dollars in our efforts to secure my son’s safety from an admitted violent offender.

My parents’ equity and retirement accounts have been liquidated and lost to this abyss of legal bills. While we once were a wealthy, highest-tax-bracket family, we are now bankrupt.

It was never once disclosed to me, or on the court record, that the participants in my case were connected through a corporation, [AFCC], which has been doing profitable business in Connecticut for approximately thirty years without being registered with the Secretary of State. 

Thirty-four billing professionals were involved in my case over the pendente lite period of approximately three years.

[Pentente lite is Latin for “pending the litigation.” It applies to court orders in effect while a matter (such as a divorce) is pending.]

Of those, about 15 were court appointments. In addition, eleven professionals were involved in my case who are AFCC-affiliated, either directly as founders and members or through publicly funded, AFCC-run GAL trainings.

AFCC affiliates involved in my case include:

• Judge Holly Abery Wetstone

• Judge Gerard Adelman

• Judge Lynda B. Munro

• Maureen Murphy, GAL

• Harry Adamakos, appointed by GAL Murphy to evaluate parents

• Dr. John T. Collins, appointed by GAL Murphy as my son’s therapist.

• Dr. Kenneth Robson, appointed by Judge Munro to evaluate my son.

• Dr. Linda S. Smith, appointed by Dr. Robson to perform psychological testing on my son, to whom my son made a clear disclosure of abuse.

• Dr. Sidney Horowitz was appointed parenting coach to admitted violent offender, father.

• Dr. Howard Krieger was appointed parenting coach to admitted violent offender, father.

• Attorney Steven Dembo, appointed by Judge Gordon as an attorney to represent GAL in appeal

• Yale Child Study Center, state referral to evaluate my son for sexual abuse

• Our Family Wizard

Maureen McCabe Murphy, the GAL in my case, was paid by the state to conduct AFCC training for the mandatory GAL program. 

Throughout my case, AFCC members and affiliates generated countless billing hours for themselves and fellow members whom they appointed to my case. 

They did this by ordering my child to be exposed to an admitted violent offender, billing many times over for “evaluating” the problems they caused, and yet again billing for “treating” the pathology they created. I was forced under color of law to patronize these businesses under threat of contempt findings and other more severe punitive judicial measures. I was repeatedly threatened with losing my child if I failed to allow this extortion to be perpetrated upon my family. In the end, these AFCC members made good on their threats, and I have not seen my child in almost two years, though I have never been adjudicated an unfit parent. 

Currently, I am ordered to see my child only through supervision, contingent upon weekly therapeutic supervision, for which no therapist will now agree to participate. Even if I find a therapist who will engage in this unethical practice, which violates the canons of their licensing board, I would still have to come up with several thousand dollars a month to see my child utilizing the specifically ordered N.J. Sarno & Co., affiliated with AFCC member Louise Truax, and who charges $85 per hour.

It has been reported that the co-owner of N.J. Sarno & Co., Nick Sarno, whose legal name is Nicolas Siconolfi, is known by the courts to have engaged in illegal activity, has six aliases and was caught forging identification information on a pistol permit. The court also ordered me to surrender my passport to Mr. Siconolfi, even though surrendering federally owned identification to anyone other than law enforcement is a crime. Of course, the bargaining chip used in the extortion was, once again, seeing my son.

During the pendante lite period, and finally, in the trial decision, AFCC member Judge Munro ordered me to pay for the ongoing use of the poorly secured website Our Family Wizard – one of AFCC’s platinum sponsors – as the only means of obtaining any information about my child.

Judge Munro was always faithful to her associates at AFCC.

Attempts at Remedy

The appeals I have filed have been denied under the most suspicious circumstances. The first I filed during the pendente lite period seeking remedy for the due process violations committed in taking my son from me. The appellate court returned a decision fourteen months later, precisely within one hour of the time the trial court decision was reached. The odds of such a random occurrence are astronomical. The second appeal I filed seeking remedy for the travesty of a trial decision was thrown out after the appellate court made a paradoxical procedural ruling impossible to comply with.

In my search for a remedy to the constitutional and other violations committed against my child and me, I have been extremely disturbed to learn that complaints to the Department of Public Health regarding the outrageous malpractice perpetrated by AFCC-affiliated licensed medical and psychological professionals are reviewed by their fellow AFCC affiliate Elizabeth Thayer. 

Complaints about the judges’ wrongdoings have likewise, without explanation, been rejected by the Judicial Review Council, on which sits AFCC member Barbara Aaron. 

I found myself in the now familiar position of being required to deal with even more AFCC-affiliated members of this Task Force who are in a business relationship with the same perpetrators from whom I seek remedy.

It’s clear to me, after several years of seeking any avenue of remedy for the extortion, graft, and child endangerment that was visited upon my family that is not populated by conflicted AFCC business relationships, that simply none exists.

Billing Irregularities

Billing irregularities have been rampant throughout my case. GAL Murphy’s billing in my case totals over $83,700 

Nick Sarno’s custody supervision billing totals over $123,000 for 16 months of supervision.

Dr. Robson’s total is over $17,000. 

However, inconsistencies are apparent when examining the itemized accounts of each and cross-referencing them. For example, meetings between them are cited in one but not mentioned in the other. It’s hard to know from the billing irregularities if I paid each of these professionals for the meeting during which Dr. Robson referred to me as a “French whore” who was “gratified by my son’s sexualized behavior.” 

At the billing rates for these professionals, I paid approximately a thousand dollars an hour to be slandered and defamed by them.

Early in my case, my assets were liquidated in a contempt hearing against me, where I was found in contempt for failing to agree to sell my house at a deflated price, though I had never stipulated or signed a purchase and sale agreement. Despite my objections, opposing counsel Noah Eisenhandler exclusively held the escrow account. Throughout the case, he continuously wrote checks on this account without notification or obtaining my consent. I was not provided with any statements regarding this escrow fund. By the conclusion of my case, the funds had all gone to Murphy, Robson, Smith, and Carlson, and nothing remained.

I was ordered by Judge Gordon and by Judge Munro to pay for my ex-husband’s discovery. Judge Gordon ordered me to pay Attorney Dembo a $5,000 retainer for his representation of GAL Murphy in the first appeal. 

It was clear from Ms. Murphy’s testimony that she felt I should bear the burden of payment alone as punishment for seeking remedy by filing the appeal. Judge Gordon even specified in her order which bank account of mine the retainer fee for Attorney Dembo must come from. 

I paid, but never once received an itemized statement – or any statement or correspondence from Attorney Dembo – much less a refund of any unused funds on the retainer.

There were also billing irregularities in Dr. John Collins’ billing statement. 

He was appointed to my case in August 2010 by GAL Murphy. I say “statement,” as in singular, because I have only received one. 

He used billing codes inconsistent with his court-ordered mandate to treat my child on this statement. When GAL Murphy was asked on the stand to explain Dr. Collins’ reasons for billing for family therapy, she refused to answer. After that, I was never allowed to see another statement. I have since received from him what amounts to blind requests for money and a threat of collections, where he stated he billed Cigna, even though my ex-husband’s financial affidavit clearly states that our insurance carrier throughout the time of treatment was Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield. 

Consistent with the aims of the interagency agreement to maximize fatherhood initiative HHS grants, and with Yale’s funding by fatherhood initiative grants, Yale Children’s Hospital used conflicting billing codes for a single visit with my son, seemingly to justify releasing him to his father’s care after my son demonstrated self-harm, and asked the psychiatric nurse for help refraining from self-harm and morbid ideation. Yale also used multiple patient numbers for my son on the same visit and erroneously listed us as an indigent family and elsewhere listed our home addresses. I can’t think of another possible explanation for this discrepancy than erroneous Medicaid billing. Upon request, the complete medical record can be made available for investigation by authorized agencies.

I’ve never seen any billing for Linda Smith, Sidney Horowitz, Howard Krieger, or Gabrielle Carlson, all of whom were appointed by AFCC members to provide services to my son.

Current Situation

In the end, it was made official in Judge Munro’s trial decision that I was not allowed to see any records regarding my son or his care.

Clerks appear to have discarded the filings I requested for a status conference. Whatever the reason for their disappearance, I can’t get on the court docket to review the impossible conditions of the trial decision. Let me reiterate that I have never been found unfit.

I can’t obtain a fair hearing or findings of fact in my case while conflicted AFCC members sit on the benches and in administrative positions in the Connecticut judicial branch and its oversight agencies. As long as they are financially, and possibly criminally, invested in obscuring facts and evidence in my case, I will not be able to obtain even a semblance of justice. My child will continue to be subject to a dangerous environment.

Proposed Solutions

When considering solutions for the seemingly ubiquitous dissatisfaction of litigants unknowingly forced into business dealings with AFCC vendors profiting under the color of law. Some suggest that the solution to rampant failure by employees of the judicial branch to abide by existing rules and regulations is enacting additional legislation that requires judges to rule children into shared custody, regardless of a parent’s history of violence or ability to care for the child(ren). I believe, however, that our current laws are robust and healthy. I think the Connecticut legislature has made sound decisions in enacting reasonable statutes that allow equal protection for citizens of this state. There is an excellent criminal code in place to deal with lawbreakers and regulation violators, and judges currently have sound tools and guidelines at their disposal to correctly determine the best situation for children of divorce. The problem is not one of poor legislation; it is a problem of flagrant violations [24] by judicial branch employees and state vendors, of federal RICO statutes, constitutional rights, federal ADA rights, judicial canon, and professional and ethical canon of medical and mental health professionals. 

The remedy for violations of canon and law is not to enact different laws.

The only sound solution to ending criminal activity is prosecution. The only sound solution to restoring fairness and neutrality to the fact-finding process is to remove the financial incentives that cause outcomes to be determined by funding mandate instead of law and demand that rules of evidence must be followed to the letter in all courts of law. 

The impropriety of judges joining trade organizations with the professionals who appear before them must end if we are ever to restore the citizen’s faith in the family court system.

All gender language from all funding sources must be removed if we are ever to see outcomes for Connecticut children determined solely by their health and safety. 

As long as various state agencies require disastrous outcomes to justify their existence and, therefore, their funding, these tragic cases will never stop.

There can be no judicial immunity when the fact-finding process deviates from strictly observed rules of evidence, judicial canon, and adherence to due process.

As part of the commission of this Task Force, you are authorized to refer your findings to the US Department of Justice. The evidence in this situation warrants your exercising of that mandate.

I appreciate your consideration of my testimony. It is accurate to the best of my knowledge and understanding. All citations are available as public records. Don’t hesitate to contact me for more details about my experiences or any additional documentation.

 The above was a slightly edited copy of Sunny Kelley’s testimony to the Connecticut Task Force at a Public Hearing on January 9, 2014.

Not much has changed since she spoke. Perhaps that was because members of the task force were also AFCC members. 


About the author

Frank Parlato


Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)

  • “… Case No 1499 of 2021

    Dr. Russell Pridgeon along with 7 other co-defendants are being prosecuted in a prosecution name ‘Operation Noetic’, for trying to protect children from serious sexual abuse. The facts and evidence of the children’s abuse are being denied and hidden from the courts by the AFP and Commonwealth DPP …”

  • “… Archbishop William Lori apologized in a statement and said the abuses are “shocking and soul-searing” and acknowledged that ‘these evil acts did occur’.” … and said nothing about The Infiltration of the Catholic Church.

    “The Report contains detailed descriptions of sexual abuse and other sexual misconduct against children. Should you need assistance please call the Victims of Child Sexual Abuse Reporting Hotline, 410-576-6312.” (not Robert Holzberg)

    Page 64 … Laurence Brett (Diocese of Bridgeport, CT) …

    Are all the “East Coast pipeline” contacts redacted?

    • What did Harold “Hank” Schwartz and Robert Holzberg say to each other about The Catholic Church? says:

      Joseph J. Kruse is #70 in the Baltimore report: on a “Medical Leave of Absence” as a “patient” in an “inpatient stay” at The Institute of Living from September 30, 1987 — January 18, 1988. “Medical” … “patient” … “inpatient stay”.

      Can we see those records?

      January 18, 1988 — June 1988, experts placed Mr. Kruse “in residence at St. Brigid Rectory and performing hospital ministry at Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT”. In the care of Hartford Hospital September 1987 to June 1988 is about nine months.

      NO experts at Hartford Hospital contact Connecticut law enforcement to report any crimes committed? The decades-long Catholic Church scandal looks a lot like the decades-long “family court” scandal. What went wrong in The Catholic Church scandal is what went wrong in the family court crisis. It almost looks like deliberate harm.

      Expert psychologists and psychiatrists managing all those cases should have diagnosed conditions. Screened for red flags. They should have done forensics. They’re mandated reporters and experts in their fields. They should have taken notes. Subjective. Objective. Assessments – and plans. What were those expertly-designed plans?

      Priests, brothers, religious sisters, bishops, archbishops and cardinals are experts in religion and spirituality.
      Judges, lawyers and legislators are experts in laws and lawmaking.
      Law enforcement officers are experts in law enforcement and crime prevention.

      Medical experts could blame religious experts when something goes wrong — but, why would they?

      Do psychiatrists and psychologists in family court cases rarely or quite often inform law enforcement authorities when children disclose abuse?

      How often did psychiatrists and psychologists at the Institute of Living inform law enforcement of crimes committed?

      If Harold “Hank” Schwartz and Robert Holzberg talked to anyone in Baltimore, maybe they talked about medicine, law, negligence, mandatory reporting or blame. Can we see the minutes from those meetings if any took place?

      “Dr. Harold “Hank” Schwartz. Arriving in the 1980s from Hartford Hospital, and working for 29 years as psychiatrist-in-chief, he is credited with reshaping its clinical landscape with the creation of such programs as the Schizophrenia Rehabilitation Program (focusing on cognitive rehabilitation), Anxiety Disorders Center, Early Psychosis Program and LGBTQ offerings, among others …

      In 2002, Schwartz was one of the few who spoke out against the Catholic Church. In stories that appeared in the New Yorker and the Hartford Courant, the Catholic Church’s use of psychiatry — or, allegedly sending priests suspected of having molested minors to psychiatrists and psychologists instead of informing appropriate authorities — became an issue.

      Dr. Schwartz was quoted saying that in “many instances” Church officials did not reveal specific information about allegations of abuse and only sent priests to the IOL for other mental health conditions, which allowed some priests to be returned to the ministry without proper assessment or treatment.”

      • Family court judges and Catholic Church bishops send cases to WHAT KIND of “experts”? says:

        The Eminent Institute of Living Accuses the Catholic Church

        By Eric Rich and Elizabeth Hamilton
        Hartford Courant
        March 24, 2002

        “… Court documents reviewed by The Courant — which contain sealed pretrial testimony from the settled Bridgeport cases — show that the diocese never referred sex-abuse allegations against a priest to civil authorities for investigation. Instead, church officials made clear they believed that an evaluation at the institute would determine the truth of an accusation. …”

        “… One former psychiatrist who worked at the hospital called Schwartz’s accusations against the church “self-serving” and said that in the 1980s, when the institute was struggling financially, it viewed the treatment of clergy as a profitable niche. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the psychiatrist said there were conversations, formally and informally, about worries that the church could take its business elsewhere …”

        • Mr. Kruse was a priest from Baltimore.

          1. What happened during his nine-month stay with Hartford Hospital?
          2. What did Hartford Hospital do to/for Mr. Kruse?
          3. Who were Mr. Kruse’s contacts in Connecticut during that time?
          4. Did Hartford Hospital bill the Diocese of Baltimore or the Diocese of Bridgeport?

          What do Mr. Holzberg and Pullman and Comley know about the Hartford Hospital cases?

          Why does Holzberg’s report seem so hyper-focused on the big and little horrible details of the abuses the Catholic priests committed — and so clueless about the background of those cases?

          Who allowed those priests in the priesthood?
          Who recruited those men into the priesthood?

          Did Mr. Holzberg look into which Communists and politics were said to have caused that crisis?

          After the priests committed the crimes, who did which forensic evaluations — and when?
          Did Hartford Hospital send any mandatory reports of the crimes to law enforcement?

          In Holzberg’s “Report on the Investigation Into the History of Clergy Sexual Abuse of Minors in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport and the Diocese’s Response to that Abuse, 1953 to the Present”, he wrote:

          “… My colleagues and I believe that we have had full access to all available records of the Diocese of Bridgeport that relate to the sexual abuse of children and youth, including records referred to by some as “secret.” However, the records are in some instances cryptic or simply do not include all of the information that an accuser or accused might wish to have presented to someone evaluating an allegation of sexual abuse or the diocese’s response to such an allegation. Furthermore, a considerable number of the people involved in the events investigated are dead or, particularly in the case of survivors of abuse, understandably have not wished to speak with my colleagues and me. Among those with whom we have been able to speak, memories of events that took place as much as a half century or more ago may well be imperfect.”

          Were Holzberg and Pullman and Comley so hyper-focused on the details of the crimes to make a case against each priest? Did they attempt prove how terrible the perpetrators were — or to prove how terrible The Catholic Church was?

          It’s interesting to note how uninterested Mr. Holzberg’s colleagues in Connecticut family courts are when perpetrators commit crimes in family court cases.

          Whichever office has the diagnostic, treatment/therapy and billing records from the Catholic priests’ cases should redact names if necessary and release that information to the public.

          Catholics in Connecticut shouldn’t need to beg Mr. Holzberg or Pullman and Comley Inc. for information all Catholics in Connecticut had a right to see decades ago.

          Meanwhile, Connecticut family court administrators should immediately release all diagnostic, treatment/therapy and billing records from all family court cases involving disclosures of sexual abuse of children — redacting names as necessary.

          Taxpayers shouldn’t need to beg Mr. Holzberg, Pullman and Comley Inc., AFCC, Inc. or anyone in any cabal for information all taxpayers in Connecticut had a right to receive decades ago.

          This is the reason all of that information needs to be released immediately:

          For the past several decades, the destruction of families and religion didn’t happen by mistake.

    • “… in the 1930s we put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the Church from within, and that right now they are in the highest places in the Church …”

      “… The practical conclusion drawn by the Red leaders was that these institutions would make it possible for a small Communist minority to influence the ideology of future clergymen in paths conducive to Communist purposes. This policy of infiltrating seminaries was successful beyond even Communist expectations …”

  • Where are Connecticut family court “scientific research“ records from 1982 - 2023 stored? says:

    Which state and federal offices provide oversight for AFCC Inc. human subject research?

    How much of that research has been unlicensed, done without oversight and done without consent from the test subjects? If consent was provided and oversight did provid accountability, which Connecticut AFCC, Inc associates kept records to document their research in child custody cases? Where are those records stored?

    How many family court test subjects want access to those records?

    In Connecticut on January 29, 1982, a group of individuals calling their business, AFCC, Inc. officially opened offices in Connecticut. Their documents filed in the Secretary of State office show they were to conduct “scientific research” in the state’s family courts. On September 10, 1984, they filed a Certificate of Withdrawal.

    February 5, 2013 Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc. filed an application to reserve the name of their business. On March 26, 2013 their “FILING #0004828917 PG 02 of 02 VOL B-01783 filed 03/26/2013 09:00 AM PAGE 01564“ submitted to the Secretary of State in Connecticut’s Secretary of State Office includes the following information:

    “The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc., (‘the Chapter’) is established to promote a collaborative approach to serving the needs of children among those who work in and with family law systems, encouraging education, research and innovation and identifying best practices. Its members include judges, lawyers, mediators, evaluators, mental health professionals, academics, researchers, court administrators, and public policy makers.

    In the event that the Chapter shall dissolve or cease function, any and all assets of the Chapter shall be dedicated and provided to the non-profit corporation known as ‘Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ of Illinois, with offices also located in Madison, Wisconsin.”

    “… research … researchers …”

    Those besides judges and lawyers etc. without judicial immunity seem to have had liability protection under “research” umbrellas. And, what about their licenses?

    The public must be protected by any means necessary, right?

    As long as bogus human subject experiments are conducted in child custody cases and state and federal offices can’t or won’t do anything about those experiments, it seems the quickest way to protect the public would be to post evidence of what’s happening in family courts online.

    As Tucker Carlson said recently, “Usually, the side that’s covering up evidence is the side that’s lying.” All records of all bogus AFCC Inc. human experiments conducted in family court cases should probably be posted online. Those experiments are clearly ongoing in “family courts”. Children and parents in family courts aren’t “parties”. They are test subjects in danger.

    The unsuspecting public is also in danger. As history shows, those human experiments in Connecticut family courts have been conducted for almost forty years.

    What does state and federal law tell investigators and prosecutors who usually handle that kind of criminal activity? Which laws allow for liability protection in “research”? Did they investigate and not prosecute because words such as “research” and “researchers” in AFCC Inc. and Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc. are added to the business records?

    Does that “research” status protect all “those who work in and with family law systems, encouraging education, research and innovation and identifying best practices. Its members include “judges, lawyers, mediators, evaluators, mental health professionals, academics, researchers, court administrators, and public policy makers” from prosecution?

    The aforementioned list of professionals include a few hundred who participated in, promoted and funded human subject research on tens of thousands of Connecticut families and children since 1982. Where are all the records of that “research”?

    Which office(s) stored AFCC. Inc “research” records from Connecticut family courts from 1982 – present?

    Do the authorities know many AFCC Inc. researchers in child custody cases experimented with Dr. Richard Gardner’s “Threat Therapy”? How many parents and children in Connecticut family courts were subjected to “Threat Therapy” experiments? How many offered their consent to “Threat Therapy” experiments? How often have family court judges forced parents to force children to receive “Threat Therapy”?

    If no state or federal office has that information, the public needs to know answers to the following:

    Which diagnostic tools are used to warrant “Threat Therapy”?
    Which individuals in the state are licensed to prescribe “Threat Therapy”?
    How often has “Threat Therapy” been used in cases involving the sexualization of children from 1982 – present?
    How much harm has “Threat Therapy” done to how many families and children forced through family courts?
    Who’s been held accountable for the harm “Threat Therapy” has done so far?

    Unlicensed and harmful AFCC Inc. human research within and across state lines for profit is an actionable offense.

    In the NXIVM case, “Brandon B. Porter, a former doctor at St. Peter’s Hospital in Albany, violated 40 state and federal regulations, according to an investigation against him by the New York Department of Health. The department’s investigation into Porter found that the doctor not only conducted unlicensed “human subject research,” but that he failed to obtain proper consent from people or keep records from his supposed studies.“

    Dr. Porter lost his license and then what happened? Did the authorities look for Dr. Porter’s research records? Did they investigate and prosecute Dr. Porter for crimes committed — or did the guise of “research” provide liability protection?

    Which state/federal offices will investigate those conducting, facilitating and funding human subject research in Connecticut family courts? Eventually, a state or federal office somewhere will need to tell the public: AFCC Inc. committed crimes across state lines since the 1980s. Better sooner than later.

  • Remember when Robson was director of Institute of Living that played revolving door with the pedophile priests? And then when caught, their official position was that the church just didn’t tell the psychiatrists *how many* boys the priests were molesting, so they can’t be held responsible for declaring them safe to return to their positions…

    • The Auschwitz-Birkenau complex was the largest of Nazi concentration and extermination camps in occupied Poland during World War II. Among those who funded and supported the Nazis were: British “Royalty”; The Ford Foundation; IG Farben; Kodak; The Rockefeller Foundation; IBM; Brown Brothers Harriman; Prescott Bush; Alfred Kinsey; and, Eugen Schwab, manager of The National Socialist Model Company for Escher-Wyss.

      The concentration and extermination camps were said to be a solution to “the Jewish question”. Kenneth Robson was said to be an “expert” working in Connecticut “family courts”. One of Mr. Robson’s many poems:


      The trains are gone,
      their tracks remain
      and all the dead.

      A stray dog sniffs
      and lifts a leg to pee.

      Across the road
      an old horse shrugs off flies
      and goes on grazing.

      Here’s another.
      “in loco parentis” means: in the place of a parent.

      Portrait of the Poet
      in Loco Parentis

      New wrinkles
      to my morning
      face the music—
      the departed
      on my case again
      base their insistent claims
      for change of face
      (in dying’s tiny
      on principles of
      eminent domain.

      If he was obsessed with death and destruction, who allowed such a sick individual to work in Connecticut family courts?


      Did you ever see
      a mother lose her child?

      I saw a baboon in the wild
      carrying her young’s remains
      clutched in her teeth—
      its limbs swung to and fro
      with every step.

      From time to time
      she paused to lay him
      on her lap to groom
      as she would in life—

      it was too soon
      to seat death
      in her living room.


      I watched you scavenging today
      for yesterday’s dead bass
      (bobbing on the morning swell,
      one milky eye fixed skyward).

      Plucked from his river bed
      you raised him up like Lazarus
      and bore him off as if he lived
      and you had killed again.

      Teach me your sleight of hand.
      I too would settle for the dead
      if I could carry them to some high tree
      and wake them there.

    • Robert Holzberg’s Goal:
      Just one group would take the fall:
      Christians in The Church

      From The Worst Interests of the Child, by Keith Harmon Snow:

      “… Someone had to take the fall, and the church was the easy target. More concerned about advertising revenues and relationships with powerful institutions, corporations like the Hartford Courant seem to have protected the powerful interests of the Hartford Hospital and the reputations of its doctors. IOL officials like Dr. Harold Schwartz, the current director and Dr. Kenneth Robson’s affiliate for more than a decade, were slamming the clergy for supposedly leaving them in the dark …

      Dr. Kenneth Robson joined the IOL in 1987 and stayed until around 2000. “I still teach there, administratively,” he said. “I came down from Boston in 1987 to direct child and adolescent psychiatry. I did that for about 10 years, or 15 years, and then I stayed on clinically teaching for another five years or so. I’ve been out [from there] about 12, 13 years. I still teach there a lot. I direct a seminar in forensic psychiatry and we did a mock trial in forensic psychiatry with Judge Lynda Munro.”

  • Check out when this committee went defunct. This is where Munro and her henchmen plotted such things as how to get their grubby hands on protected college funds. Turns out the answer is very easy! Just change the rule and then the very next hearing you can order the college funds liquidated to pay for more of your mafia professionals you order on the case…

    (Yes, there are meeting minutes.)

    • All Munro, Wetstone, Dranginis, Adelman and the rest ever focused on is billable hours, cash, court time is a revenue generator reserved for mafia members, pro se folks like Rose Strobel are tossed out, while parents with money can have 86 days of trial with unlimited filings … Wetstone knows who profits from suffering of family court … nothing to do with law, just shekels.

  • Isn’t it interesting that the pedophiles don’t really swarm the comment sections of articles about their fraud like they do articles focused on their outrageous behaviors? It’s a hell of a pattern to notice…

  • Crazy and delusional Connecticut family court discruntaled litigants. You are not allowed to refer to Rico, currupt or any illegal acts. No one wants to hear that. How has all this been going on for years?

    • If you have a screwball case in CT, just try going to get your file from the clerks. They even tried to hide it from my trial atty, but grudgingly had to let her see it the day before trial started, ONCE, in a room with 3 marshalls, she had to give them her phone and they inspected all the notes she took about what was in my file. I had 3 attys for the trial but only the primary atty was allowed to see the file alone.

      I’ve tried dozens of times over the years to see the file and the clerks lie and give me the runaround every single time. There is nothing you can do to force them to get your file if they have it flagged not to produce it. I can only assume it’s been bonfire fuel by this point.

    • Thank you so much for letting us know.

      Please share this information with all willing and able to help:

      Empowering and equipping a movement of thousands of people like you to report things that are wrong, with the support of an in-house team of elite journalists to bring factual, unbiased stories to light. …”

  • Anyone know if Dr. Jessica Biren Caverly PhD has been seen recently in family court testifying to her demonic expertise in childhood destruction? Has the family court been shamed out of using these quacks? Asking for a friend.

          • “O’Keefe Media Group is building an army of investigators and exposers along with the most elite journalists in the world. In the coming months you will see this army expanding across the country, every statehouse, every city council, every school board and everywhere people are conspiring to keep themselves in power, practice favoritism, or line their pockets with tax dollars.”


      • Bruce Freedman is currently on a case with Sue Coussineau (Gal). He continues to destroy mother child bonds with complete disregard for humanity.

        He has told the child his brain is disordered and his mother is crazy and alienated him from his father.

        Bruce Freedman, like Robert Horwitz is protected by family court judges.

        There is no finding against the mother by dcf. The court has endorsed this isolation order for a year. Bruce Freedman is the “expert” the court relies upon.

        • Bruce is a Gardener lover. He sees alienation in all the cases. He’s incapable of seeing anything else That’s why they appointment him. They put him on the cases so they can get take the children away and element Mom. Time and time again.

          • People who like to stick things in children like to stick things in children. They cooperate with each other so they can stick more things in more children. Simple as.

          • I’m going to guess that Connecticut is not keeping statistical data on custody outcomes. Individual judges, gals and psychologist. That would be too logical. Incriminating evidence possibly?

    • The burning question is who inherited Keith Roeder’s creepy pedo statue garden in the courtyard of his office…

      • Connecticut mainstream news didn’t report the significance of the sculptures of naked children in various poses in that courtyard. Mainstream news also didn’t report the sculpture of the phallic symbol erected about ten yards to the left of the front door of O’Rourkes diner in Middletown. It’s only in about 1 out of 100 photos in image searches.

        Most of us are too afraid to discuss what’s been happening. Dr. James Lindsay is right: “mystery religions” control many state governments and they hide in plain sight. Traditional Christians, Jews and Muslims are the main targets, now: Set up to fight with each other.

  • The drumbeat of Connecticut family court is the anti-Christian agenda, rape of childhood, destruction of family, intrusion of chosen ideology into private lives, disinformation, denouncing natural order, all promoted with tax dollars, state employees, selected ‘therapists’, the modern day mind control, culture destruction effort by the wardens of the gulag. You are in the box car.

    • Paul is smart enough to know about most of history. Why does he blame “Jews, spics, niggers and gays”? says:

      It’s the discrimination of the dark side:

      evil vs. Good

      A few individuals in government offices had the money to buy the influence to arrange for certain tenets of certain philosophies to take over American public schools. Those in those circles also arranged for family court judges, lawyers and private vendors to use certain protocols and procedures to advance certain tenets of certain philosophies.

      (Shhh! Everything about that is a big secret.)

      Those tenets in practice in “family courts” are crimes according to our common laws. Those tenets are not crimes according to laws of those hidden practices and beliefs.

      Some of those tenets justify: the provocation, funding and waging of war; the killing of millions of people; and, the sexualization of children in public schools and family courts. Those tenets build concentration camps; create bioweapons; push porn hubs; and, allow drug cartels to monopolize open borders of once-sovereign nations. They organize racial, gender and religious division to destroy nations on purpose. They teach followers that our beautiful world is evil — and that it must be destroyed to “build it back better”.

      They believe abuse isn’t always abusive. Mandatory genetically-engineered mRNA injections; Aleister Crowley’s practices; Keith Raniere’s practices and Richard Gardner’s twisted theories about what he considered to be acceptable abuse in family court cases are those tenets of those well-hidden philosophies.

      Those who put such crimes into practice out in the open for all to notice knew the public (some call us “the profane”) would have no idea what was happening in “family courts”. The profane are to think stealing money from children and families is good. That “family court” lawyers should charge $750 an hour to destroy families and children. That such crimes serve “the best interest of the children”. Those practicing those tenets think no oversight or accountability for those crimes against children and families is warranted, since all crimes committed for their greater “good” by any means necessary is acceptable and necessary to achieve their smaller goals for profit and the larger goals of political power and control.

      To know who’s discriminating, find out who committed what crimes in family courts, when and where. Most importantly, find out why and how. Has anyone documented the why and the how, yet? Those philosophies and tenets hiding blatant crimes have plagued family courts for the past forty years — about the same time public school curricula changed from a focus on academics to “social and emotional learning”.

      • Family courts and schools:
        It’s law now. Did you know that?
        Slop pushed down our throats.

      • He probably knows about all of the thousand plus expulsions for messing with children. Students of history know history. Funny how it’s the same group, every time, and in an amazing coincidence it’s also the same group with disproportionate power right now too… Hmmmmmmmmmmm…

    • Attorney Nickola Cunha is Catholic lawyer. She noticed discrimination in Connecticut family courts. 🤔 says:

      Project Veritas: So have you found, like, that certain religions tend to be more right-wing?

      Jeremy Boland: Almost all of them.

      Project Veritas: What do you mean?

      Boland: The only one, and I’m not a huge expert on religion, but Protestants in this area are probably the most liberal.  But if they’re Catholic?  Conservative.

      Project Veritas: Soooo. So then what do you do with the Catholics?  If you find out that someone is Catholic, then what?

      Boland:  You don’t hire them.  [laughs]

  • Just curious why nobody has petitioned to collectively censure the AFCC? Or sue the bad actor evaluators/GALs, and key financial beneficiaries of cases like this in a class action suit? To Richard’s point, there are only a small handful of lawyers who make 90% of the money in these cases because they consistently bill clients millions of dollars: Gary Cohen, Sally Oldham, Wayne Effron/Ruben Midler, etc. Maybe a few more on the outskirts who aspire to be like them. The evaluators and GALs who are complained about are also all the same names as in Sunny’s list–Sid Horowitz, Harry Adamakos, Eric Frazier, David Israel, etc. Focus on calling out the bad apples who consistently make poor choices that remove children from safe parents, and the rest of the situation will improve. There is also the issue of fatherhood funding in CT, which has painfully infiltrated DCF, the domestic violence agencies and the courts over the past decade.

    • It’s all over CT. Every court house. It’s not just cases involving large amounts of money. Same patterns. Paperwork in the court is a complete misrepresentation of cases. Files missing from the clerks office. They got away with it in 2014. They don’t give a shit. They are going to continue to do it until the people in the state put a stop to it. The state it’s self is profiting so they cover it up.

  • I read a study once that said CT is number 50 out of 51 (second worst) in terms of protecting children from abusive parents. Fairfield County is the epicenter of this, because of the money and corruption. Much of what you share is aligned with the experience I had, although yours is so painful to read because it is just the worst of the worst lined up one after another. The players in bilking families for everything they have are always the same, with so much overlap. Harry Adamakos was the worst of them all in my case–he is a sick human who lies freely and cares more about his bottom line than about children. I am pained for the pain you experience. I pray you will be reunited with your son. Kudos to you for speaking out.

  • Please check out bill number SB 289. In may of 2022. Stating all Connecticut father’s to be engaged in their childrens lives. The application this has on custody cases. There are no initiatives for motherhood. This is a blanket statement that appears to override safety and judgement in some cases. . Appears to be providing preferable treatment to fatherhood over motherhood. Currently the fatherhood initiative in Connecticut is looking for more funding. This bill may also explain why the court is enforcing reunification therapy. Another very interesting situation is the labeling of women such as Claire as a sex offender. Increasing statistics of women as offenders. This is all very interesting as it relates to custody matters. Our gun laws are not the only answer to the DV situation in Connecticut. The on going labeling of women and the lack of value of motherhood in the state of Connecticut has been felt and touch the lives of women and children. There is always the possibility of the lawyers insensitive financially to discriminate against a father. Our family court justice system needs a complete over haul. The leadership in the Connecticut government needs to stop labeling people discruntaled and crazy. As a convenient way to fail to get to the root of the problem. Please note that 173 legislators voted for the bil and Minie Gonzaleze was absent.

  • Now consider that official position CT argued in federal court is that separating illegal alien children for even a couple of days while it’s being determined if they’re actually related to the people who claim to be their families, is child abuse and unconstitutional. American children, Connecticut children, can be separated, trafficked, raped, and the official position the state takes is that this is judicial discretion of their best interest.

  • Child abduction in family courts is going on throughout the country. It’s driven by the AFCC – but the patterns are so well established that these criminals operate like a well oiled machine.

    They move so fluidly that by the time an unsuspecting parent realizes what’s happening, their fate is sealed.

    Within weeks of entering family court, the game is set and your life is over. The deals have been predetermined. Switching attorneys does no good as the agreements are made and it’s not in the attorneys best interest to go against the court mafia.

    • I cannot reply the way I’d like to without revealing my email to, which would identify me with other social media accounts (I’m a survivor of DV), a situation I do not want right now. I understand how that works because I too blog, and when people submit comments, their emails are required (and websites solicited) for the record. I will however. Simply say this. I am WELL aware of the situation reported in this article, and of (most of) the documents on Scribd just posted. I know individuals who were involved in the research on the Liberti/Sunny Kelley case at the time, and I urged people to pay attention to who is on those commissions and task forces, as I already had been, although I’m not in Connecticut (or even the East Coast USA). … and without understanding who else AFCC works with, and how it works (which takes personal effort), listing a bunch of member names isn’t helpful. AFCC does NOT work alone. I am more interested in so many advocates and professionals (and until not so long ago, most journalists, freelance and certainly most mainstream) refused to admit how entrenched this AND other nonprofits were in these systems. I’m old enough to be tired of having to repeat this year after year, while journalists with apparently some more freedom and time (?) than I have, re-hash old material with their name in BIG LETTERS at the top, and whose voice it was (“slightly edited”) at the bottom without external links for readers. Thanks for publishing this. A friend alerted me to it and wanted me to comment, so I have.

    • Spot on. Watch my attorney change drastically in the beginning of the case. He was definitely conflicted and under alot of pressure. I’m sure the fact the opposing attorneys organization gives campaign contributions to the democratic party did not influence my case at all. Because everything in the court system is on the up and up. The second attorney didn’t give a shit. The firm was happy to bill me a few thousand dollars to argue with the attorney. Forced into signing an agreement that was not good for me or the child. There is definitely a huge problem in the court system.


    Unwanted is a good documentary about real hero’s who save orphaned children from being legally “ replaced “ like cattle on display for perspective owners AKA “parents “.

    As one might imagine, once nefarious “ parents” get a hold of these children, sexual, physical and emotional abuse runs rampant.

    This documentary shows how bad and good people can be through a good souls journey to rescues these precious children from a vile organization.

  • Call me dense, but I don’t understand the conflict of interest. Isn’t it kind of like saying every member of the National Writer’s Union is somehow in cahoots and can’t be trusted? Makes no sense. They are all in the same field of work, so it makes sense they would participate in the same work-related organization that provides education etc. How is this a conflict of interest? Can anyone spell it out for a dummy like me?

    • Sure. The factors that courts recognize in unfair competition and cartel-like cases boil down to three general categories numerosity, geography, and course of dealing/relationship.

      Numerosity. There are a small number of CT family court lawyers and an even smaller number that practice regularly in any particular county. They have great power over the rendition of legal services in the area, and because of their chosen profession, they have a higher ethical standard than the morals of the marketplace. The small, concentrated power is distinct from a union of writers, for instance, that unites to generally promote freedom of expression and the press, and seek business and education opportunities. The NWU could never corner the market on expression. The Fairfield County Family Court Lawyers, for instance, could.

      Geography. All these CT lawyers are located in one small state and then, more specifically, organized around specific courts. The geographical concentration makes collusion and price-fixing that much easier. Writers are strewn across the country and the world. There is no monopoly or oligopoly on the market of ideas, the same way there is a geography-based oligopoly in CT family courts.

      Course of dealing/relationship. The primary purpose the CT Family Court lawyers get together is to improve their economic conditions and maybe even price-fix, ensuring minimum fees across the board. Writers get together more primarily to improve the environment for free expression, education, and opportunities.

      The US Attorney for the District of Connecticut could have an open and shut anti-trust case against several of these CT Lawyers groups. But that would be political and career suicide, so it will never happen. And the cartel continues with impunity.

      • We need to demand it. The state is supposed to be be servings the people. They are serving themselves. Get the elected officials out of office if they can not do their job. Miniie Gonzalez is one of the only ones looking out for the public. Put Minie back on the judiciary committee .

        • The monsters that be took Minnie off the judiciary committee as she was exposing the evil of the family court. You live in the gulag. Give it up. You children will be abused at will of your masters.

      • Thanks for taking the time to explain. You lost me here:

        “The primary purpose the CT Family Court lawyers get together is to improve their economic conditions and maybe even price-fix”

        What is the evidence that is the primary purpose of the AFCC?

        “Writers get together more primarily to improve the environment for free expression, education, and opportunities.”

        It’s obvious you haven’t been a writer for long. Professional writers, especially independent/freelance/copywriting/fiction ones, absolutely get together to exchange ideas to help each other optimize earnings. It’s a business as well as a calling.

        • You really don’t see how a branch of government that exists to mete out justice fairly can’t create a business model of promoting its services and enriching the people it appoints to cases without that being at a minimum the appearance of collusion? It’s one of the first canons not to create an appearance of impropriety. Do you understand what a forced contract is?

        • The primary purpose of AFCC is laid out clearly in their materials, seminars, newsletters, and activist wings of their organization, which they have bragged about openly for years until enough people wised up to the racket. I’d have to spend time, which I won’t do, collecting and then posting many links, but you can find what you’re looking for in the archives of their newsletters going back to the 90s. You’ll even see first lady Clinton in there as she is lauded for her efforts to fund the “village” it takes to raise (traffic) children…

          You can find their annual meetings online with lists of speakers, topics, and praise for their success in growing the industry they have created. There even exists a clip of a judge from Arizona giving a lecture to her cohorts explicitly stating how much babies are worth to the state to remove from parents and put into foster care and adoption.

          If you think writers have the power to force litigants into contracts with other writers, take children away from fit parents, and operate a trafficking ring I don’t know what to tell you. There is nothing even remotely comparable.

          • I still don’t get it.

            So if I’m a young family law attorney, on my first day on the job, and someone says, “Hey, if you want continuing education etc, you can join this nonprofit organization.” So I join and attend some seminars. Now somehow I’m now colluding?

          • I’m not purposely being obtuse. I know next to nothing about this organization, but it doesn’t seem abnormal to me that people who work in the same field of family law would join the same professional organization. But you are all saying this is somehow a criminal enterprise. Ok. Where is your evidence?

        • 9:50, 11:07, 11:39 and 10:01,

          “ (a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of such income, in acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. A purchase of securities on the open market for purposes of investment, and without the intention of controlling or participating in the control of the issuer, or of assisting another to do so, shall not be unlawful under this subsection if the securities of the issuer held by the purchaser, the members of his immediate family, and his or their accomplices in any pattern or racketeering activity or the collection of an unlawful debt after such purchase do not amount in the aggregate to one percent of the outstanding securities of any one class, and do not confer, either in law or in fact, the power to elect one or more directors of the issuer.

          (b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.

          (c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.

          (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsection

          (a), (b), or (c) of this section.

          For everyone else,

          “… a) Whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that any person or enterprise may be in possession, custody, or control of any documentary materials relevant to a family court racketeering investigation, he or she may, prior to the institution of a civil or criminal proceeding thereon, issue in writing, and cause to be served upon such person, a civil investigative demand requiring such person to produce such material for examination. Mr. Nusbaum should be first on Mr. Tong’s list.

          (b) Each such demand shall —

          (1) state the nature of Mr. Nusbaum’s conduct constituting the alleged racketeering violation which is under investigation and the provision of law applicable thereto;
          (2) describe the class or classes of documentary material produced thereunder with such definiteness and certainty as to permit such material to be fairly identified;
          (3) state that the demand is returnable forthwith or prescribe a return date which will provide a reasonable period of time within which the material so demanded may be assembled and made available for inspection and copying or reproduction; and
          (4) identify the custodian to whom such material shall be made available. (An honest lawyer, if you can find one.)

          (c) No such demand shall—

          (1) contain any requirement which would be held to be unreasonable if contained in a subpena duces tecum issued by a court of the United States in aid of a grand jury investigation of such alleged racketeering violation; or
          (2) require the production of any documentary evidence which would be privileged from disclosure if demanded by a subpena duces tecum issued by a court of the United States in aid of a grand jury investigation of such alleged racketeering violation.

          (d) Service of any such demand or any petition filed under this section may be made upon a person by—

          (1) delivering a duly executed copy thereof to any partner, executive officer, managing agent, or general agent thereof, or to any agent thereof authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process on behalf of such person, or upon any individual person;
          (2) delivering a duly executed copy thereof to the principal office or place of business of the person to be served; or
          (3) depositing such copy in the United States mail, by registered or certified mail duly addressed to such person at its principal office or place of business.

          (e) A verified return by the individual serving any such demand or petition setting forth the manner of such service shall be prima facie proof of such service. In the case of service by registered or certified mail, such return shall be accompanied by the return post office receipt of delivery of such demand. …”

    • The Connecticut Committee on Judicial Ethics spelled it out on April 19, 2013 ... Where’s the FBI? says:

      Ten years ago this coming April, The Connecticut Committee on Judicial Ethics discussed four different work-related organizations — all having to do with the legal profession.

      The “nonprofit organization” they discussed was The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc. They reserved the name on February 5, 2013 and had just filed their certificate of incorporation and first report on March 26, 2013 — so, April 19, 2013 was perfect timing for the Committee on Judicial Ethics to compare their group with The Connecticut Bar Association, The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers and The American Academy of Appellate Lawyers.

      It seems as though Mr. Adelman, Mr. Horwitz and Mr. Freedman etc. wanted to know if they could get away with incorporating and pretending to be a 501(c)(3).

      The Judicial Ethics Committee discussed “whether a Judicial Official may serve on the board of directors of [The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc.] that provides services to court-involved clients and receives the majority of its funding from contracts with the Judicial Branch. … [W]ith one member recused, [the committee] unanimously determined that service on [The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc.’s] board of directors would violate Rules 1.2, 1.3, 3.1 and 3.7(a)(6)(B).”

      • On March 26, 2013, The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc. submitted a filing to the Connecticut Secretary of State, describing their organization as follows:

        “The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc., (‘the Chapter’) is established to promote a collaborative approach to serving the needs of children among those who work in and with family law systems, encouraging education, research and innovation and identifying best practices. Its members include judges, lawyers, mediators, evaluators, mental health professionals, academics, researchers, court administrators, and public policy makers. In the event that the Chapter shall dissolve or cease function, any and all assets of the Chapter shall be dedicated and provided to the non-profit corporation known as ‘Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ of Illinois, with offices also located in Madison, Wisconsin.”

        Friday, April 19, 2013 (five weeks later) The Connecticut Committee on Judicial Ethics discussed “whether a Judicial Official may serve on the board of directors of a non-profit that provides services to court-involved clients and receives the majority of its funding from contracts with the Judicial Branch. …”

        “[W]ith one member recused, [the committee] unanimously determined that service on [The Connecticut Chapter of AFCC, Inc.’s] board of directors would violate Rules 1.2, 1.3, 3.1 and 3.7(a)(6)(B).”

        The violations the ethics committee noted are significant:

        Rule 1.2. Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority between Client and Lawyer …
        Rule 1.3. Diligence …
        Rule 3.1. Meritorious Claims and Contentions …
        Rule 3.7. Lawyer as Witness …

        Did an office reviewing criminal violations ever check to see what happened?

        Who prompted the Committee on Judicial Ethics to discuss “whether a Judicial Official may serve on the board of directors of a non-profit that provides services to court-involved clients and receives the majority of its funding from contracts with the Judicial Branch“?

        What prompted the Committee on Judicial Ethics to discuss “whether a Judicial Official may serve on the board of directors of a non-profit that provides services to court-involved clients and receives the majority of its funding from contracts with the Judicial Branch“?

        Did The Hartford Courant, New Haven Register and CT Law Journal ever report what happened in 2013?

    • The history of the AFCC in Connecticut should tell you otherwise. These people have taken the system using parental alienation made a gold mine out of it. If it was an occasional case you might see it. They’re using Gardener a complete lunatic. It’s like a bunch of people seeing UFOS every where. UFO sightings in every court room all day every day. All for profit. They have made a rare occurrence in to an everyday get rich quick . At the expensive of defenseless people.

    • They collude to rig case outcomes to maximize their own profit through theft and extortion, as explained in this piece, as well as ways to optimally rig for funding mandates to maximize grants and other sources of public income. It’s nothing more or less than a criminal mafia. Belonging to a business entity designed to promote their business is not compatible with the appearance of fairness in a court proceeding.

      They do not report any of their looted treasure. OIG did an audit one year and found $13million missing from CT Judicial and inexplicably took a “no prosecute” stance.

      Even the Comptroller never sees a single document about anything that goes on in Family Court. Payoffs, kickbacks, bribes, threats… all invisible to the taxman and auditors.

  • The dark side of family court is the ideology of familial destruction worshipped by non-Christians, what is the phobia against admitting to the parasitic infiltration of an enlightened society? Afraid of being labelled anti-semitic?

    • This world view of dividing Jews and non Jews is not the way to solve CT family court problems. This destroying families for profit is not Jewish. It is anti-Jewish.

      • If all the heavy hands in CT family court are jewish, how is it not a conclusion that severing mother-child bonds is a jewish effort? Not even atheists are into such inhumane form of ‘best interests’. Is there any religion that works so hard to run a kangaroo court in the opposition to the human condition? Please tell.

        • But they are not all Jewish. In fact, I would argue none of them are Jewish, for Judaism supports family bonds and honors both mothers and fathers.

          Adelman or Grossman are not Jewish. They are beastly creatures regardless of what religion they may have been born into.

      • Frank needs to study history, the attack on the sacrament of marriage, creating the ‘no fault’ divorce, belittling commitment in the eyes of the state, further applying marriage to Gary & Gary, even transgender butchery, elimination of parental powers over children is all jooish … truth is always fair!

  • May enough “family court” insiders soon find a tiny bit of courage.

    “Q Now, at that time, was there any blog coming out that was covering what was happening with DOS?

    A Yeah, there was this blog called The Frank Report that started blogging about all this and blogging about DOS and blogging about different people in the NXIVM community. I guess it had been doing that for a while, but it was not on my radar.

    Q And at some point, did you appear on that blog?

    A Yeah. And right — maybe like two or three days after I officially pulled out of The Source, an article came up online that said that I was a, like, sex slave of Keith Raniere’s.

    Q And, so, what happened after that?

    A It was, like — it was just that, like, tiny bit of, like, courage or whatever I needed. It was like that flash of reality and it was just, like, the last little thing and I was like, okay, no. Just no. Like, no. What I — what I thought that I was getting into back then was a women’s empowerment group and now there is something saying that I am somehow a man’s sex slave?

    I’m like Allison told me in the car that she wasn’t going to release my collateral if I leave. Like, the company is imploding from like the inside out. Like, I think I can do this. Like, I can do this and it will be safe and I’m just going to do it. Like, now is the option. Like, now is this little window when I can get out, and I’m taking it.

    And it was just — that was it. That moment, I wrote Allison a letter and I said, I’m not doing this anymore. It’s not for me.”

  • Are you sure all the laws are healthy? There is a law passed from 2022 the is biasing the conditions of family court.

    • They went to work feverishly trying to protect their racket after publicity broke in 2012-2015 and a thousand parents made their cases known. They switched verbiage and slightly switched their tactics, and in the end they ran out everyone who could get in their way, and finally secured orders of magnitude more budget for their child trafficking operation.

      • The Hartford Courant even published an opinion from a guy who called it “a call to arms”. Settle down, PBDetector. Paul didn’t write that one.

  • Susan Skipp has the same AFCC players in her case, same judges, including Adlemanand Murphy was rewarded by pedos with judicial appointment and was a judge five years later when Susan was still fruitlessly trying to rescue her kids. Same Kids haven’t hugged their mother either for 12 years. Krieger and Horowitz had contracts with the state that were not completed as far as anti discrimination clauses, what’s more Deb Fuller only opened bidding for the state contracts for 45 minutes at 11 am on a Sunday. Afcc much? You want a list of moms?

    • This is taken from the link above-
      “ AV Grants
      While still in prison on a burglary charge in 2005, Joshua Komisarjevsky began filing appeals to try to increase access to his young daughter, whom he had out of wedlock with then-16-year-old Jennifer Norton. Komisarjevsky used grant funds available for prisoners and parolees. By 2007, he was granted sole custody. Months later, he and John Hayes broke into the home of the Petit family and killed four people.”

      – the Petit family tragedy was widely reported on but the family court custody piece was concealed.

      • In every “family court” crime in corporate news,
        the family court custody piece is always concealed.

          • Nah, they make more money putting children in danger, where they can then order endless services and endless billable hours for the mafia friends. Human suffering is their commodities market.

  • ✅ Lynda B. Munro
    ✅ Gerard Adelman
    ✅ Bruce Freedman
    ✅ Maureen Murphy
    ✅ Sidney Horowitz
    ✅ Robert Horwitz
    ✅ Keith Roeder
    ✅ Nick Sarno

  • What’s changed is that two years- without seeing her son- is now nearly a decade. Sunny’s was one of the first stories from Ct to hit the news and still one of the worst.

    • The power of the people. Connecticut. The system in Connecticut is not to happy of the coverage. Even if it’s the truth. Abuse of power and punishment for people engaging in their right to speak out to educate the public. The state government and the system is designed to protect and serve the public interest. This is not happening and hasn’t . The Connecticut residents and the residents every where need to hold the governmental powers to be responsible to perform the duties they were elected or appointed to do. The system needs to fixed before further harm comes to humanity

      • Keep complaining and a SWAT team will pay you a visit, just to remind you that your expressions are not wanted by your masters, now shut up, get in the box car.

      • Apparently, now all we need to do is agree on definitions for:

        state government
        public interest

  • Priorities of CT Family Court:
    1. Fatten up bank accounts of attorneys at clients expense
    2. Delay as much as possible to fatten bank accounts of attorneys
    3. Safety of kids

      • Take the family law attorneys off judiciary committee. Get them off the state agencies period. No exceptions. No more AFCC psychologist period .

        • Publishers and editors in corporate mainstream news should have informed the public about the obvious conflicts of interest in the judiciary committee years ago.

          So much harm has been done in and by “family courts” for the past forty years — and so much harm is still done — because residents of the state can’t protest what they don’t know.

    • Putting children in danger is what makes them the most money. Safe and happy people just get on with their lives and don’t need interventions. Put children in danger with the stroke of a pen and suddenly they need all kinds of services, conveniently provided by the judges’ business partners, where the traumatized kids are then ordered into all manner of interventions… Problem, reaction, solution.

    • “Priorities of CT Family Court:
      1. Fatten up bank accounts of attorneys at clients expense
      2. Delay as much as possible to fatten bank accounts of attorneys
      3. Delaying cases and fattening up bank accounts of attorneys at clients expense to destroy children and families

  • Nothing has changed.
    The afcc in CT officially disbanded as a business – once racketeering and the illegalities were exposed, but there was zero accountability.

    The players remain as do their affiliations with the AFCC.

    Gerard Adelman, Bruce Freedman, Linda Smith, Sue Cousineau, Nancy Aldrich, Jessica Biren Caverly, Robert Horwitz, Rick Rockland… they all continue to drain martial funds, deny records, and abuse children.

    Linda Smith was brought on my my own attorney- Richard Callahan-a snake and child abuser- and I’ve yet to get a bill. Callahan simply took my money and gave it to her.

    I had Robert Horwitz as a court appointed family therapist. I was against his appointment. My word didn’t matter. My consent never required for I was locked out of all accounts and my husband agreed to pay.

    It’s a runaway train as soon as you enter family court.

    Thank you for publishing the tragic and abusive journey of a wonderful mother. Sunny could not have demonstrated wrong doing any better but no one will help her regain custody.

    In cases where the state holds no interest, the courts are violating the rights of citizens and violating their own laws.

  • She paid $1 million and still didn’t get custody? Well, that certainly goes against the narrative that the parent with money always gets the kid.

        • His grandfather was a political fixer for the pedo mafia going way back to Gooley’s Tavern in New Haven.

          • Was that West Haven or New Haven — and which practices needed a haven a few hundred years ago? 🤔

            Hint for Paul’s Research Department: Sunny noticed a cover-up in the West Haven police department offices. One of the involved judges had contacts with hobbies having to do with Harry Potter fascinations and pagan practices, not reading the Torah, prayers or traditional blessings.

            Those who committed those horrible crimes in “family courts” probably won’t say this prayer at sundown tomorrow:

            “Blessed are You, Lord, our G-d, King of the Universe,

            who sanctifies us with His commandments, and commands us

            to light the candles of Shabbat. Amen.”


          • One group has been expelled over a thousand times for torturing children and it’s not pagans.

    • Lots of narratives and motives are everywhere. Is it not terrible enough that parents give all their money to lawyers and private vendors in family courts? Did you even read the public hearing testimony?

      Did you read Mr. Robson’s “poetry”?

      Mr. Robson was a sick man.

      Which state office let him work in “family courts” for so long and how many lives did he destroy?

About the Author

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in hundreds of news outlets, like The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CBS News, Fox News, New York Post, New York Daily News, Oxygen, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, The Sun, The Times of London, CBS Inside Edition, among many others in all five continents.

His work to expose and take down NXIVM is featured in books like “Captive” by Catherine Oxenberg, “Scarred” by Sarah Edmonson, “The Program” by Toni Natalie, and “NXIVM. La Secta Que Sedujo al Poder en México” by Juan Alberto Vasquez.

Parlato has been prominently featured on HBO’s docuseries “The Vow” and was the lead investigator and coordinating producer for Investigation Discovery’s “The Lost Women of NXIVM.” He also appeared in "Branded and Brainwashed: Inside NXIVM, and was credited in the Starz docuseries "Seduced" for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Additionally, Parlato’s coverage of the group OneTaste, starting in 2018, helped spark an FBI investigation, which led to indictments of two of its leaders in 2023.

Parlato appeared on the Nancy Grace Show, Beyond the Headlines with Gretchen Carlson, Dr. Oz, American Greed, Dateline NBC, and NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, where Parlato conducted the first-ever interview with Keith Raniere after his arrest. This was ironic, as many credit Parlato as one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083