Afterword

Everything I submitted to the Court was true, none of it ever denied, solely being countered with a continual stream of legal roadblocks to prevent accountability.

As shown above, my ex “allegedly” successfully poisoned one of our boys and “allegedly” attempted to do the same with the other after “allegedly” initially doing something similar to me earlier on; it was a continual nightmare for the three of us and never properly addressed in Court due to the fractured system including — most importantly — faulty checks/balances.

While the demonstrable reporting to the Court of malfeasance and or “alleged” abuse was never denied, an Evidentiary Hearing was never permitted.

Additionally, I had borrowed a significant amount of money to pay for a Court Appointed Social Investigator whose “report” turned out to be completely false: she never bothered to take the time to examine the numerous items of factual evidence for which she told me to, “just leave it all at my office”, nor did she ever contact any of my supporting witnesses, including, most egregiously, the physician-specialist at All Children’s Hospital, St. Petersburg, Florida who concluded “poisoning, as reported”. 

Based on her false (and clearly prejudicial) Social Investigation “report” I was deemed to be “the problem” possibly, and or simply, because I sport XY chromosomes.

The boys both laughed, albeit in shock, when each read the “report” because it was so wrong while also seemingly so malicious; neither could fathom how this “report” could ever have been written and submitted to the Court being so false.

I ended up filing a lawsuit against the psychologist and her agency, which, btw, apparently has a “quota system” (as exposed within court hearing) whereby practicing psychologists are “allegedly” compensated based on the number of paid sessions each has with their patients (amazing, but apparently true — what is the motivation for a psychologist working within this company to “graduate” a patient if income is attached on an “alleged” contract that, in order to be paid, is tied to the number of billable sessions one has?), however, this particular psychologist and the psychology-corporation she represented successfully defended themselves by declaring “professional immunity” while never denying anything within my complaint pertaining to its falsity and or biased intent.

There are no legal checks and balances for those few who are (clearly) bad apples yet continue working with personal agenda(s) within the system, the system that we, as parents, depend on.

Demonstrated within the recorded documents above, Sarasota’s 12th Circuit Court failed in their fiduciary duty to protect my children when there was indisputable evidentiary material of “alleged” abuse involved; the problem is not with those working in good-faith, just with those few individuals whose prejudicial actions lack any form of ethical and or legal oversight mechanisms.

“It is what it is” should never be a fallback: transparency, such as that presented here, provides resolve, if not solution, in addressing a flawed legal system that fails children and, in itself, causes further damage.