Christopher Ambrose is escalating his custody battle with his children and their mother, Karen Riordan, by making extreme allegations of parental alienation in his latest court motion.
Ambrose claims that Riordan has exerted undue influence over their teenagers and violated protective orders. However, he provides no evidence to support these allegations other than his word.
The dispute between Ambrose and Riordan dates back four years, involving multiple judges in the Connecticut Family Court system. Ambrose has been accused of stalking his children physically and in court, while Riordan has fought for her right to maintain a relationship with her teenagers.
In a surprising move, Ambrose obtained a restraining order against Riordan on behalf of their teenagers, against their own wishes. Instead of returning to their father, the teens ran away and sought refuge with their grandfather in Rhode Island, a family friend in New York, and eventually their cousin John, also in New York.
The turning point in this custody battle occurred on April 24, 2020, when Judge Jane Grossman granted custody to Ambrose, displacing the children from their home of 13 years. This decision sparked controversy and raised concerns about the potential harm caused by misapplied parental alienation.
Now, Ambrose is seeking the intervention of Judge Erika Tindall, the eighth judge involved in the case, to take drastic measures. His requests include imprisoning Riordan based on his unsupported allegations, restricting Riordan’s ability to file motions in her defense without prior approval from the judge, and ordering her to cancel the children’s phones, despite the lack of evidence that she owns or controls them.
Ambrose’s motion also aims to prohibit Riordan from sharing any information with specific websites, including the Frank Report and social media accounts. Furthermore, he demands that Riordan inform Cousin John that she wants the teens to return to Ambrose, which John is supposed to tell the teens.
He wants the mother to communicate with a third party since direct communication with her children is barred by order of Judge Thomas O’Neill, the 7th judge in the case.
In an ironic twist, Ambrose had previously shut off the children’s cell phones, leading family and friends to provide them with alternative devices. Now, Ambrose wants Judge Tindall in CT to order that Riordan cancel the teens’ phone services and to have somebody in NY take away their physical phones from the kids and hand them over to him before he “returns” them to Riordan.
However, in his motion, he provides no evidence that Riordan has control of their phone plans.
Sawyer’s biological mother, Tara Southern, told FR:
“News flash, Chris Ambrose. Sorry to inform you of this. But you, Karen, nor anyone else will take Sawyer’s cellular phone because I bought it for him, and it’s on my fucking account. Sorry to burst your bubble Tito! Now. What’s next??”
Ambrose’s latest filing also targets Southern, who filed a motion to protect her son from Ambrose following allegations of sexual abuse. Ambrose argues that Southern has no standing in the case due to the closed adoption and lack of contact since Sawyer’s birth. However, it is worth noting that the adoption was not actually closed, and Sawyer was able to find and establish a relationship with his biological mother, who helped him escape from his allegedly abusive father.
Additionally, Ambrose seeks financial compensation from Riordan for his costs, even though he is representing himself in the case. This raises questions about the involvement of his previous attorney, Alexander Cuda, who may no longer be involved in the proceedings.
Ambrose insists he is the victim of the mother’s efforts at parental alienation and the Riordan “exerts coercive control over the children’s thoughts, emotions, and actions.”
The theory of parental alienation, where one parent is accused of turning the children against the other parent, gives little heed to children’s voices.
Paid experts like Dr. Jessica Biren-Caverly are often brought in to determine the existence of parental alienation, a practice that raises questions about their impartiality given their dependency on lawyer referrals.
Using Caverly’s report, which he paid for, Ambrose succeeded in persuading judges that Riordan, the mother, was guilty of parental alienation.
A note discovered on Ambrose’s desk prior to his divorce filing revealed his concerns about a three-year extramarital affair he had with someone and its potential impact on custody and court-ordered payments.
The note ended with two words written in capital letters – “PARENTAL ALIENATION” – indicating a preplanned strategy to gain custody and avoid payments.
Sawyer, 13, who has alleged for years that his father sexually molested him, made the following statement yesterday about Ambrose and the parental alienation specialist, custody evaluator Jessica Biren-Caverly, who performed the custody evaluation that led to Sawyer being separated at age 9 from his mother – in 2019 – when the children still lived with their mother.
It was Caverly’s report, paid by the father, that Judge Jane Grossman [judge #2] used to flip custody to Ambrose.
Here is what Sawyer says:
Caverly destroyed our lives. She didn’t listen to anything we told her. She talked to me for 15 minutes and decided we were liars and abusive to Chris when he was the liar and abusive to us.
She forced us with Chris. And now we finally escaped the abuse, but Chris shows up at our relatives and threatens to have us physically removed from here and forced back with him.
He told us if we refuse to go with him the court is going to separate us and put us into three different facilities. He also said he has a bright future but we have no future. He threatens us constantly. We can’t be forced back with him. We want to live and go to school here where we are safe and happy.
This is what happened with Caverly. Thank you for helping us and thank Rob Harvey for trying to protect us. We need to be protected because he’s deceived the courts. Thanks.