Is Connecticut a haven for pedophiles thanks to parental alienation?
The Ambrose case is rooted in parental alienation. The CT Family Court ignored the children’s charges of abuse by their father.
The court decided that the mother caused the children to say their father was abusive. They decided this without hearing from the children or the mother. They based it on the word of the father alone and his paid advocates of parental alienation.
Chris Ambrose
Three judges protected Chris Ambrose against a severe investigation for abusing his children. Why, because the highly paid [by Ambrose] experts said it was parental alienation.
The three judges who supported this are Judge Thomas Moukawser, Judge Gerard Adelman, and Judge Jane Grossman.
Judge Thomas Moukawsher
Judge Thomas Moukawsher was supposed to hear evidence of whether Judge Adleman showed bias in the Ambrose custody and divorce case.
The mother’s attorney, Nickola Cunha, mentioned Judge Adelman was colluding with people of the same religion as he. They were all Jewish.
Moukawsher, a Catholic, had no interest in hearing about three children losing a mother.
Attorney Cunha alleged this was a racketeering operation based on money, not religion.
Moukawsher flipped it around.
Yes, Cunha alleged the colluders were Jewish. She also said it could be Catholic, or Italian. It could have been men or women. She was trying to show evidence of something more serious.
She mentioned they were all Jewish – to show the pattern of commonality – and tried to move on.
Nickola Cunha
Judge Moukawsher said the word Jew 14 times in successive questions to get her to focus back on it. She was trying to present evidence of collusion. He was trying to make her anti-Semitic.
Between them, they said the word “Jew” 77 times. Moukawsher said it 52 times. Cunha said it 25 times – 23 of which were in reply to his relentless questioning.
She never said Jews are bad or anything anti-Semitic. Moukawsher tried to get her to say those things.
Here is a sample:
Judge Moukawsher: Judge Adelman secretly knows that certain people are Jews and not Jews and that somehow he favors them because of that? I mean, this is a very serious thing to say.
Cunha:… I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. It’s well-known within the Jewish community who the Jewish professionals are…
Moukawsher: What evidence do you have that there’s a universal understanding among the Jewish community as to what professionals are Jewish or not? I mean, that’s a dangerous thing to say.
He was right. It was dangerous. He disbarred her for it.
What happens to the Ambrose children is meaningless to Judge Moukawsher. He was gunning for Cunha. And Cunha set herself up. And she got gunned down.
That was a good thing for the profiteers in CT Family Court.
Now E.P. Pluribus weighs in.
By E.P. Pluribus
What the judges did in the Ambrose case — and hundreds of cases involving disclosures of child abuse — is how judges, attorneys, and evaluators handle many cases.
Marv Bryer’s research about corruption, racketeering, and criminal perversion in California family courts will give a reader an idea of the corruption and racketeering that spread to Connecticut.
Look for information about Richard Gardner.
“Dr.” Gardner was a custody evaluator, just like the custody evaluator for the Ambrose case, ‘Dr.” Jessica Biren-Caverly.
Gardner is the creator of the parental alienation theory, which Dr. Biren-Caverly used in her custody evaluation report to separate the Ambrose children from their mother:
As part of his theory, Gardner proposed that pedophilia serves procreative purposes.
Although the child cannot become pregnant, a child drawn into sexual encounters at an early age is likely to become highly sexualized and crave sexual experiences during the prepubertal years, Gardner believed.
A ‘charged up child’ is more likely to transmit his or her genes in his or her progeny at an early age.
Gardner said, “The younger the survival machine at the time sexual urges appear, the longer will be the span of procreative capacity, and the greater the likelihood the individual will create more survival machines in the next generation.”
PAS was developed by Dr. Gardner in 1985 based on his personal observations and work as an expert witness, often on behalf of fathers accused of molesting their children.
Richard A. Gardner, M.D., is the creator and main proponent of Parental Alienation Syndrome theory. Prior to his suicide, Gardner was an unpaid part-time clinical professor of child psychiatry at Columbia University. He made his money mainly as a forensic expert.
Gardner knew that children are devious predators.
He said, “At the present time, the sexually abused child is generally considered to be ‘the victim,’ though the child may initiate sexual encounters by ‘seducing’ the adult,” Gardner said. “If the sexual relationship is discovered, the child is likely to fabricate so that the adult will be blamed for the initiation” of sex.
Gardner knew that a lucrative business could be made from affluent pedophile fathers who have the money to pay attorneys, therapists and expert witnesses.
“It is because our society overreacts to it [pedophilia] that children suffer.”
Gardner claimed Parental Alienation Syndrome is “a disorder of children, arising almost exclusively in child-custody disputes, in which one parent (usually the mother) programs the child to hate the other parent (usually the father).”
Gardner proposed that pedophilia, sexual sadism, necrophilia (sex with corpses), zoophilia (sex with animals), coprophilia (sex involving defecation), can be seen as having species survival value, and thus do “not warrant being excluded from the list of the `so-called natural forms of human sexual behavior”.
“There is good reason to believe that most, if not all, children have the capacity to reach orgasm at the time they are born,” Gardner said.
He would know.
Gardner authored more than 250 books. He is the inspiration for the CT Family Court system in high conflict cases, where the father has more money than the mother.
“Older children may be helped to appreciate that sexual encounters between an adult and a child are not universally considered to be a reprehensible act.”
Gardner felt that Western society is “excessively moralistic and punitive” toward pedophiles.
Gardner maintained that “the draconian punishments meted out to pedophiles go far beyond what I consider to be the gravity of the crime. The current prohibition of sex between adults and children is an overreaction.”
It was Gardner’s parental alienation syndrome alone that the judges used to justify taking the Ambrose children from their mother.
Dr. Gardner committed suicide by taking pills and stabbing himself in the heart at 90-degree angles.
But beyond that, the Ambrose court file and transcripts show the judge and attorneys colluded for profit in their own best interest. They used parental alienation as a means to make money.
Judge Moukawsher was supposed to read the file and all the transcripts. It could be that Judge Moukawsher disbarred Cunha because of all the awful politics floating around.
But consider. He said it was dangerous to say that Jews in a certain profession know each other.
Which of the following is most offensive?
“I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the Irish community who the Irish professionals are…”
“I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the AFCC community who the AFCC professionals are…””
“I don’t think it’s some secret knowledge…. it’s well-known within the young lawyer community who the young lawyers are…”
Whichever label is most offensive doesn’t matter.
Judges, attorneys, and auxiliary profiteers grossly mishandled the Ambrose custody case after the (Hispanic) judge almost saved those children from the hell that followed.
After the little cabal (that just as easily could have been all Democrats, all Republicans or all Boomers) took over, they passed the case to and from each other.
Each made a lot of money and/or secured future professional opportunities.
Aspiring criminals in Connecticut might want to know:
Can any kind of cabal in family courts mishandle allegations of corrupting morals of minors, grooming, and associated behaviors?
Yes!
DOJ offices won’t do anything about it!
They haven’t yet, and there’s no sign they will anytime soon!
It’s not that Connecticut family courts have been crime-free since opening for business. It’s that a few shrewd individuals figured out a way for attorneys and random vendors to make lots of money in for-profit, purposely adversarial mandatory court cases.
For-profit and non-profit corporations, American Legal Institute “model penal codes”, various Kinsey groups, Dr. Gardner protocols, Jessica Pearson and “AFCC, Inc.” all made it happen.
And, of course, those who count on guaranteed income when children and families are in danger. Court administrators know exactly what’s happening.
Did the Ambrose case have anything to do with religion before Judge Moukawsher focused on Attorney Cunha’s passing comments?
What matters most?
Whatever those who colluded had in common… or the collusion, profit, and opportunity the cabal chose instead of the best interests of the children?
Attorney Cunha complained about collusion, dishonesty, lack of law, and lack of protection for the children and their mother.
She didn’t insult any religion or denomination, as Judge Moukawsher apparently thought.
Had Attorney Cunha complained about the Irish, Muslim, or young lawyer community, Judge Moukawsher would have allowed it — and he should have allowed it.
Courts find facts, not distractions. Utility AND justice.
Not one or the other.
“Justice and general utility, such will be the two objectives that will direct our course,” François Gény once wrote.
Moukawsher complained about the mention of a common religion, not the collusion.
Why did he do that?
