Bandy X. Lee's Blog

MAJOR WASHINGTON CONFERENCE ABOUT SEVERE CORRUPTION IN THE FAMILY COURTS

Help Us to Expose a Hidden, Deadly Crisis!

The Family Court system in our country is seriously corrupt, extremely dangerous to families, especially to women and children, and opens wide the door to judicial criminality in ways few Americans can fathom unless they have experienced it. While it is disturbing to consider that a system set up to protect families is in fact preying on them, the problem will not solve itself unless the public demands it.

Thus, for the first time ever, we are organizing a major national conference in Washington, DC, that will expose this growing humanitarian and constitutional crisis. The event will take place next month in the Grand Ballroom of the National Press Club, the nation’s most prominent venue for major policy announcements and human rights discussions.

One of the country’s most celebrated constitutional and human rights attorneys, Bruce Fein, Esq., will give the keynote address. Acclaimed forensic psychiatrist, Bandy Lee, M.D., who taught at the Yale School of Medicine and Yale Law School for 17 years and is now chief medical officer of the Institute of Forensic Science — dedicated to bringing rigorous science into the Family Courts — will be organizing the event.

Dr. Lee has previously very successfully organized two major national conferences at the National Press Club in which key Congress members have spoken. The first was held in 2019 and was considered so important, it was broadcast by C-Span in full for the entire three hours. The second held last year was featured full-page in the influential Politico publication and assembled 19 distinguished speakers, including retired military generals, a former Republican member of Congress, a former White House chief ethics lawyer in the Bush/Cheney Administration, and many top academic experts and public intellectuals who all came together for the public interest.

As Dr. Lee has said: “I could not have imagined the violence and trauma coming out of the Family Courts just a few years ago. Now, after years of research and first-hand experience as an expert witness in nearly 70 cases across the country, I now recognize this as one of the most urgent public health crises of our day. Children and women are dying, and hundreds of thousands of lives are being destroyed for profit, year after year — and the public is in the dark because of gag orders and court seals.”

Speakers and an anticipated large audience will be coming to the conference from all over the country. Among the many speakers will be key legislators who have already sparked a national movement, long-time activists, health professionals, and former child victims of Family Court. Dr. Lee herself testified at hearings this year held in both Arizona and Idaho about the corruption and dangers to families of Family Courts. Her testimonies:

Arizona Testimony of Dr. LeeIdaho Testimony of Dr. Lee

This historic conference in Washington, DC, will serve as a prelude to a proposed Congressional hearing on Family Court reform — an essential step toward national oversight, a Uniform Family Court Code, and the end of judicial impunity in this most unregulated and dangerous arena of government.

How You Can Help

As with previous conferences, it is now vital that this fundraising effort be successful to cover the considerable costs of putting on and promoting this urgently needed conference. We greatly appreciate your contributions to help make this happen! We urgently need your help to fund:

Venue rental at the National Press ClubAudio-visuals and recording for national distributionTravel and lodging for speakersPublic outreach and media promotion

The link is here: https://www.gofundme.com/f/major-conference-on-family-court-violence.

Every contribution — large or small — will help bring the truth to light and help protect families, defend children, and restore integrity to one of the most broken parts of our nation’s justice system.

Thank you for your participation, in advance!

[image error]

PRESS RELEASE — MAJOR NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FAMILY COURTS TO BE HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FOLLOWED…

PRESS RELEASE — MAJOR NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FAMILY COURTS TO BE HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FOLLOWED BY PLANNED CONGRESSIONAL HEARING

Also Featured will be Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca’s Impeachment and Her Now Infamous Actions in Patricia Lee’s Case

NATIONWIDE — A landmark national conference on Family Courts will take place this fall in Washington, DC, convened by Dr. Bandy X. Lee, a renowned forensic psychiatrist, violence expert, and public health advocate, alongside other leading academics, journalists, and survivors of the harm and injustice Family Courts inflict on children and families across the country. The event builds on the national momentum of a growing body of legislatures holding official hearings about the national crisis of the Family Courts.

The initial session will be held in the Ballroom of the National Press Club, where Dr. Lee has previously organized major national events. One was broadcast for its full three hours on C-SPAN, while another was featured full-page in Politico. Following opening remarks, Dr. Lee will deliver a keynote presentation on the case of her sister, Patricia Lee, and how her two children came to be exposed to unspeakable and unnecessary violence, because of grave judicial misconduct. Now, impeachment proceedings against the judge, Jane Gallina-Mecca, led by famed Washington Constitutional attorney Bruce Fein, are underway.

The next session will move to Capitol Hill, where members of Congress are expected to attend. Members of the national press are anticipated to cover the event. The conference is intended to lay the foundation for a full Congressional Hearing on Family Courts, now being pursued with the support of legislators from states across the country. Many of the legislatures have already held or will be holding hearings on the widespread abuse, systemic injustice, and the silencing of victims of violence in the Family Courts.

“This conference will bring long-hidden truths into the open,” says Dr. Lee. “It is about in a system that, instead of protecting the most vulnerable and innocent members of society, has preyed upon them.”

Dr. Lee, who has most recently testified before the Arizona and Idaho legislatures, has warned of the devastating impacts of unchecked judicial authority. The case of Patricia Lee and her children exemplifies the broader crisis: Judge Gallina-Mecca has shielded and enriched an abuser — Alan T. Chan, a man documented to be psychopathic, violently abusive, and homicidal — while stripping the protective mother of custody and evicting her from her home. Over 3,000 petitioners have already called for Judge Gallina-Mecca’s impeachment.

Resources:
· Arizona Testimony of Dr. Lee
· Idaho Testimony of Dr. Lee
· ImpeachMecca.org
· AlanTChan.com

Media Contact:
Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div.
BandyLee.com
Phone: 917–328–2492
Email: bandy@bandylee.com

[image error]

Famed Lawyer Bruce Fein Appears in New Jersey Court with Dr.

Famed Lawyer Bruce Fein Appears in New Jersey Court with Dr. Bandy Lee, Exposing Family Court Abuses and Unconstitutional Attempts at Censorship

Thank You for Joining Us on September 12, 2025, at Bergen County Courthouse, where Dr. Lee was on Trial for Her First Amendment Rights

The gross human rights violations against children and loving parents in the Family Courts are able to happen because victims are isolated from one another, and witnesses and whistleblowers are silenced and crushed. On September 12, 2025, thanks to your presence, we were able to pierce that stronghold a little further in a rare, public hearing.

“I thought I was alone in suffering this”; “I never knew there were so many people!” exclaimed those who arrived from far and wide, having flown and driven from as far as North Carolina and Virginia to a tiny provincial court in New Jersey. “I so admire your courage”; “I am still standing because of you”; “You are my inspiration!” were some of the heartwarming messages with which they came.

The courtroom was filled, and even the guards appeared prepared to receive Bruce Fein, Esq., as they gave him a front-row seat. Filmmakers interviewing him outside the building before the trial were moved to tears by his passion for justice (they are already familiar with the abuses of Family Courts), and the attendees gathered around him during break to hear his interpretations, as if listening to the Sermon on the Mount.

Fein’s presence was indeed extraordinary: a modest, ascetic man but a dynamite of a legal mind, called upon by governments around the world for establishing their own Constitutions, juxtaposed against a lying, posturing, bloated yes-man “judge” illiterate of the Law, simply carrying out the corrupt commands of Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca (chief judge of Bergen County Family Court).

“Guardian ad Litem” Evelyn Nissirios, the plaintiff, is “Judge” Gallina-Mecca’s underling partner in most crimes, the most brutal gangster posing as an “officer of the court” one ever saw: my accusations of her being a child predator and a trafficker of children to their rape, battery, attempted murder, pedophilic sex rings, and Satanic cults are based on extensive interviews of victims, material evidence, and fact. Unheard of peacetime atrocities are par for the course in Family Court, and Nissirios is at their center in this small New Jersey county. She did not like that I called her the “Adolf Eichmann” of the Family Courts, but her testimony revealed that she did not even know who is Franz Kafka.

Nissirios is a graduate of a law school that lost its accreditation a few years ago and was once considered, “the place for people who can’t get in anywhere else — a school of last resort.” She filed for a protective order with a crony judge of the same Family Court, because the proper recourse — a defamation lawsuit — would warrant a process of discovery, and truth is a constitutional defense under the First Amendment. She would have no case, and the revelations of her crimes could get her not only disbarred but imprisoned.

I stumbled a bit at the outset because of my first time being pro se at a trial — or anything other than an expert witness at any trial — but Fein’s presence was indispensable. He redirected me to ignore everything the judge said and to return to the central question: “Your Honor, having sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution to be sitting where you are today, it is your obligation to explain on the merits how my constitutional rights are not being violated.”

Judge Michael Antoniewicz kept saying that this was what he was trying to decide through the trial, but I insisted: “I ask that you stipulate now, how your order falls within the narrow exceptions to infringing on constitutionally-protected speech, as defined by the Supreme Court decision, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976) — or, if not, to dismiss this case.”

I clarified: “Articles one has to look up the Internet to find are not harassment.”

Nissirios cried out: “It is not just me! Anyone googling my name will come across these articles.”

I asked: “What is worse, the discomfort of having to read the truth about your actions, or having to suffer the consequences of your actions as victims?”

Nissirios further tried to turn my assembling attendees at this as well as another hearing — on criminal charges I brought against her in another court — as forms of stalking. Yet, just as she never sued me for defamation, she never sued me for malicious prosecution, since any process outside of her crony court would entail actual legal procedure and discovery.

Judge Antoniewicz, visibly uncomfortable at my repeated demands for proof of constitutionality of his temporary protective order, adjourned an hour earlier than initially stated.

There is a reason why the First Amendment so threatens them: Family Court players spot and partner with violent criminals, such as my former brother-in-law Alan T. Chan, who becomes the “hook” around which they kidnap children from the innocent parent and “sell” to him, extort exorbitant “child support” and fines, and liquidate the assets of the loving parent so that she cannot fight back, and then use their multi-billion-dollar industry to suppress the press and silence witnesses such as myself. It is truly a heist of proportions unimaginable in civilized society and would blow up spectacularly if the public got any significant wind of it.

Indeed, ironically, one of my articles Nissirios complained about during the trial is entitled, “One Thing Terrorizes Family Courts like Nothing Else: Exposure of TRUTH.”

In order: Dr. Bandy Lee, Judge Michael Antoniewicz, Atty. John Conte, and Evelyn Nissirios

Here are some of the responses from the audience:

Dr. Lee, you were incredible today! You made all three of them look corrupt and ridiculous!

I don’t know if the judge is immoral or amoral, or just oblivious to the whole concept of morality, but you gave him a black eye — you gave all of them a black eye!

The GAL is a vile sociopath…. You inspired everyone there today and across the country!

Our presence was powerful and made a difference. By showing up, we reminded them that we are … growing louder, stronger, and more determined to demand change.

The filmmakers, staying to the very end, took videos of the group speaking in unison: “Truth! Justice! Human rights!”

Interestingly, during the break and after adjournment, we were not asked to clear the path — or I asked to stay in the courtroom for a half-hour to give Nissirios time to leave — making it clear that Nissirios left through the judge’s chamber! What privilege, and what opportunity for private conference and additional scheming, that I cannot imagine being offered to a battered woman from a trailer park, asking for a protective order that would save her life….

Fein, whose invaluable time I did not previously wish to occupy in a kangaroo court, now wishes to represent me at the next session. He will also be filing additional papers with the federal court.

Next, our collective project will be to try to open this issue nationally, and I hope you will join me in Washington, DC, in October!

Below are some excerpts from my opening argument at the trial:

Your Honor, this case presents a grave constitutional question: whether the Family Court may silence a citizen — an internationally-recognized expert on violence who has dedicated her life to protecting children and society — through unconstitutional gag orders and contempt sanctions…. The core issue is this: I have been trying to expose that Bergen County Family Court is systematically engaged in trafficking children to their torture, rape, battery, and attempted murder for profit — and Plaintiff Evelyn Nissirios is at the center, because of her brutality and violence — so much so that she nearly murdered my sister several times. The orders at issue therefore constitute unlawful prior restraints in direct violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments with respect to a matter of critical public interest.

I am not speaking in hyperbole. The United Nations Human Rights Council meticulously documented Family Court abuses through a Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, published on April 13, 2023. It highlighted that: “The tendency to dismiss the history of domestic violence and abuse in custody cases extends to cases where mothers and/or children themselves have brought forward credible allegations of physical or sexual abuse.”

Transparency plays a pivotal role in deterring judicial abuses. It discourages perjury, the misconduct of participants, and decisions based on secret or open bias or partiality, as per Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia (1980). Jeremy Bentham in the Rationale of Judicial Evidence (1827), similarly noted: “Without publicity, all other checks are insufficient.”

Your Honor cannot avoid the constitutional issues. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution establishes the Supremacy Clause, asserting that the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties are the supreme law of the land, superseding conflicting state laws. Article VI also requires all federal and state officials to take an oath to support the Constitution, as a qualification for any public office….

None of my postings accusing Plaintiff Nissirios of horrific acts prompted her to sue me for defamation, where truth is a constitutional defense under the First Amendment. Nissirios did not sue, because she is fully aware that … her countless lies and acts of harm would be subject to legal scrutiny — and could get her disbarred or imprisoned.

My postings were directed at the public. To the extent Plaintiff Nissirios knew about them, it was because she voluntarily chose to look them up on the Internet. Unable to sue for defamation, Nissirios obtained a temporary protective order, or TPO, from Judge Michael Antoniewicz, with whom she has worked extensively in the past….

When I requested an audio recording of the April 4, 2025, proceeding, [an incriminating] segment was missing…. Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca, who violated my First Amendment rights in the past and whom I suspected to be behind this unprecedented TPO from the start, issued a protective order on [this apparently tampered] recording without notice or constitutionally required findings on the record.

On August 8, 2025, the Court denied my emergency motion to subpoena raw digital files and system data necessary to verify the record, despite concrete evidence of irregularities…. As a pro se litigant, I have been denied procedural leniency, while Plaintiff’s misconduct, documented perjury, and life-threatening assaults against my sister have been excused. This mirrors the bias with which Judge Antoniewicz granted Plaintiff a TPO for inconvenient speech, while denying my sister a protective order against Plaintiff, when Plaintiff may be established to have engaged in attempted murder more than once.

Plaintiff Nissirios’ cross-motions for sanctions have been used as weapons of intimidation and unjust enrichment, echoing a pattern of extortion: her latest demand of the amount of $7698.75,… brings the total to nearly $40,000 in sanctions she extracted from me and my sister alone.

The misuse of protective orders in this case reflects a broader pattern of corruption and abuse within Family Court that has left my sister impoverished and debilitated, while causing irreparable harm to children and families more widely….

Sanctioning me under an unconstitutional order contravenes established law: “A void order is no order at all and cannot be enforced.” See Ex parte Siebold (1879). Furthermore, Plaintiff’s pursuit of sanctions mirrors a pattern of threats and intimidation designed to punish whistleblowers and to extract money under color of law. [S]uppression of free speech automatically establishes irreparable harm under Elrod v. Burns (1976) and its progeny. Every day Judge Antoniewicz’s December 5, 2024, TPO remains in effect is a further violation of my free speech rights.

As a forensic psychiatrist and violence expert who has dedicated my life to public service, silencing me not only injures me but harms the public’s right to know about misconduct — and harm against innocent children and loving parents — in their courts.

*Please help us to impeach Bergen County Family Court chief judge, Jane Gallina-Mecca ! She, with the help of Evelyn Nissirios, practices serial kidnapping and serial murder; traffics children to unspeakable suffering; and falsely arrests, intimidates, and violates the Free Speech of witnesses. You can find more information about her at ImpeachMecca.org , and detailed documentation of her crimes at AlanTChan.com .

[image error]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — FAMED LAWYER BRUCE FEIN TO APPEAR IN NEW JERSEY COURT WITH DR.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — FAMED LAWYER BRUCE FEIN TO APPEAR IN NEW JERSEY COURT WITH DR. BANDY LEE, EXPOSING FAMILY COURT ABUSES AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ATTEMPTS AT CENSORSHIP

“Free Speech … is under assault by the Family Courts.”  — Dr. Bandy Lee

Trial Date: Friday, September 12, 2025

Time: 11:00 a.m.

Location: Bergen County Courthouse, 10 Main Street, Room 108, Hackensack, NJ (before Judge Michael Antoniewicz)

HACKENSACK, NJ, UNITED STATES / — On September 12, 2025, foremost Constitutional attorney Bruce Fein, Esq., once on a short-list of potential nominees to the United States Supreme Court and who has served at some of the highest levels of government, is traveling from Washington to appear in New Jersey Superior Court. He will be observing the trial of acclaimed forensic psychiatrist and violence expert, Dr. Bandy X. Lee, who faces serious unconstitutional sanctions, contempt orders, and possible imprisonment for exercising her First Amendment rights.

Dr. Lee’s “offense” is simply exercising her Constitutional rights to write and speak about fraud, corruption, and human rights violations in Bergen County Family Court. Pending before Judge Michael Antoniewicz, the case centers on retaliatory gag orders and sanctions designed to intimidate and silence her.

“It is little known that women and children are more likely to die upon entering Family Court than if they had not,” Dr. Lee states. “Mothers who lose custody of their children, for example, are twelve times more likely to die in ten years. Almost a thousand children are documented to have been murdered in the context of Family Court, with many of them knowingly facilitated. Shocking judicial abuses are being covered up through secrecy.”

A distinguished psychiatrist who served on the faculties of Yale and Harvard, Dr. Lee is recognized worldwide for her research on violence and public health. Her work has brought national attention to threats to democracy and constitutional governance.

In April 2025, Fein filed a federal lawsuit on Dr. Lee’s behalf, asserting violations of her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights through unlawful gag orders, protective orders, and sanctions. Attorney Fein, who has played key roles in impeaching three U.S. presidents, is preparing the articles of impeachment against Chief Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca of New Jersey Family Court.

Dr. Lee, who helped bring national attention to major issues of public health concern in the past, will hold a major National Press Club and Congressional conference on Family Court violence in Washington, DC, in October. Her prior conferences have drawn national coverage from C-SPAN, a full-page in Politico, and leading experts from across the country.

*In-person attendance only. Please note that there will be filming on site.

Resources:
· Arizona Testimony of Dr. Lee
· Idaho Testimony of Dr. Lee
· ImpeachMecca.org
· AlanTChan.com

Media Contact:
Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div.
BandyLee.com
Phone: 917–328–2492
Email: bandy@bandylee.com

[image error]

‘Killer Family Courts’

Arizona Lawmakers Expose Corruption, Murdered Children, and a Billion-Dollar Custody Cartel

Since my testimonies before the Arizona and the Idaho legislatures on Family Court violence, there have been additional hearings both in Idaho and in Arizona. I have always underscored the need to cover Family Court abuses in terms of preventable killings from murder, mayhem, and suicide — and to leave behind the convoluted legal and academic verbiage — so as to call attention to the true magnitude of the crisis, in stark medical terms. Without this, we will fall short of appreciating the true severity of this national emergency — without appeasing, pleasing, or trying to sound “professional”. This would amount to a Battered Nation Syndrome. Now, after more than three years since I started urging this approach, legislatures are hearing it, and journalists are covering it:

Murdered Children, Abusive Exes, and a Billion-Dollar Custody Cartel

By Richard Luthmann

Published August 29, 2025

Shocking, gut-wrenching testimony rattled … a Joint Legislative Ad Hoc Committee hearing on August 27, 2025, [as Arizona] Senator Mark Finchem and Representative Rachel Keshel presided over an explosive inquiry into family court corruption.

The scene was part exposé, part rallying cry — a final public hearing where desperate parents and whistleblowers laid bare a system that they say routinely puts children in danger….

One national advocate even applauded Arizona for “leading the way” on this issue — with 17 other states reportedly watching the proceedings closely. This hearing underscored why many now frame family court reform as the civil rights fight of our time….

For nearly three hours, witness after witness delivered harrowing accounts of institutional betrayal: judges ignoring evidence of abuse, child protective services (DCS) snatching kids from loving relatives, and court-appointed experts milking parents for cash….

“This should never happen. Not once, not ever,” testified one expert, emphasizing that hundreds of children nationwide have been murdered by abusive parents after courts dismissed safety concerns.

Finchem and Keshel vowed Arizona would spearhead a national crusade to end these horrors. Their message was clear: the days of “kids for cash” justice are numbered in Arizona.

A formal report with reform recommendations is due within weeks.

Killer Family Courts: Kathy Sherlock and Kayden’s Law

The hearing’s first witness set the tone with a story so tragic it silenced the room. Kathy Sherlock, a mother from Pennsylvania, recounted in gripping detail how her 7-year-old daughter Kayden was brutally murdered by her ex-husband after a family court denied her pleas for supervised visitation. Sherlock fought back tears as she described years of sounding the alarm about her ex’s instability — to no avail….

Kayden Mancuso with her mom, Kathy Sherlock

Sherlock’s worst nightmare came true:… during one of those unsupervised visits, the father smashed Kayden’s skull with a 35-pound dumbbell and tied a plastic bag around her head, killing the little girl in cold blood. He then committed suicide, [leaving] Sherlock outraged and devastated.

In halting but forceful words, Sherlock told lawmakers how the system failed her family at every turn. She spent 18 months and tens of thousands of dollars battling for her daughter’s protection, only to be accused of “parental alienation” by her ex’s attorney and ignored by the judge.

“I buried a beautiful 7-year-old after spending thousands of dollars in a system I had faith in. I thought it would protect her,” Sherlock testified, voice shaking. “No parent should have to bury their child — especially when it could have been so easily prevented,” she said.

In a blistering indictment of family court culture, Sherlock noted that even convicted abusers can have more rights than their victims in custody cases….

But Sherlock refused to let her daughter’s death be in vain. She channeled her grief into activism, becoming the driving force behind Kayden’s Law — a package of reforms designed to prevent such tragedies.

“I honored my daughter by working tirelessly to campaign for family court reform,” she said, describing how she and fellow advocates pushed Kayden’s Law all the way to the White House.

In 2022, President Biden signed the reform into federal law as part of the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. Sherlock has since traveled state to state, urging local legislatures to adopt Kayden’s Law provisions. Arizona’s hearing was one more stop on that mission.

“We’re in 10 states so far,” she noted, stressing that every state needs to implement the law’s life-saving measures.

Finchem and Keshel thanked Sherlock for her courage. Her message was unambiguous: Kayden’s death was preventable, and the “backwards” family court practices that put a child with a known abuser must be overhauled — in Arizona and across the nation.

Killer Family Courts: National Movement and Pollock’s Call to Action

Next came Danielle Pollock, a leading voice in the national family court reform movement. Pollock, policy manager at the National Family Violence Law Center, helped originate Kayden’s Law at the federal level. She flew in from Washington, D.C. to put Arizona’s fight in a broader context — and to issue a rallying cry for America’s other 49 states.

Her testimony was both blistering and inspiring. Pollock applauded Senator Finchem and Rep. Keshel for “leading the way” by holding these public hearings.

“I’ve encouraged other states to follow suit,” she said, praising Arizona for exposing what has long been hidden in family courts.

Pollock framed the stakes in stark terms: “Kayden is one of many children — one of hundreds, if not thousands — who have been murdered by an abusive parent after a court was involved, and safety concerns were raised by the protective parent, but custody was nevertheless granted to the dangerous person,” she said. “This should never happen. Not once, not ever.”

She cited chilling examples: A Florida little boy named Grayson, a Utah child named Aum, a California girl named Piqui, a New York boy named Tommy — all killed by a parent after courts ignored warnings and forced unsafe visitation. In one case, a mother in a witness protection address program was still ordered to hand her kids to the abusive ex she was hiding from — with deadly results.

“Days later, she’s dead — stabbed and beaten in her home,” Pollock recounted, describing how the father then gained full custody of the children after the mother’s murder.

In another case, a Texas mother was murdered by her ex. Yet, a family court gave custody of their child to the killer’s father — allowing the imprisoned murderer ongoing access to the boy.

Pollock’s litany of horrors made it painfully clear: what happened to Kayden is happening nationwide, in case after case, due to a broken system.

Despite the grim content, Pollock … noted that the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women studied this crisis and “named Kayden’s Law as a best-practice model for nations to emulate”….

By the end of Pollock’s testimony, it was evident that a national movement is afoot — and Arizona finds itself at the forefront. Finchem thanked Pollock for her expertise and vowed the state would not let her down.

Killer Family Courts: Attorney Moore Exposes the Legal Cartel

If Kathy Sherlock and Danielle Pollock provided the heart and vision of the reform movement, Attorney Michael Moore brought the receipts. A veteran trial lawyer of 45 years, Moore has made a career out of suing Arizona’s child welfare agencies on behalf of wronged families.

He stepped up to the microphone with a wry challenge: “I appear here today to attempt to convince you all to put me out of work,” Moore declared….

What followed was a blistering whistleblower account of how the family court/DCS apparatus operates, essentially as a cash machine for professionals. Echoing earlier witnesses, Moore asserted that money is the root of the problem: by his estimate, “it’s a billion-dollar business in this country” — a “cottage industry” of judges, lawyers, custody evaluators, therapists, and others all profiting from high-conflict custody fights.

“People are making billions off of this industry,” he said bluntly, “and if they change it, it hits ’em in the pocket”….

Representative Keshel later dubbed this insidious practice a “legal cartel” that preys on families’ desperation. Moore agreed, describing how even court-ordered “reunification therapy” programs can be a scam — expensive camps that “force children to bond with” an abuser under threat of punishment….

Beyond the financial gouging, Moore exposed a stunning lack of accountability. He testified that Arizona’s DCS (Department of Child Safety) has an Ombudsman’s Office that receives “between 10,000 and 12,000 complaints” each year — and essentially none get remedied…. Meanwhile, when families sue DCS for violating their rights, taxpayers end up footing the bill….

“DCS does not hold those people responsible who are found to have violated constitutional rights,” he emphasized.

In two of his victories, the caseworkers who traumatized families kept their jobs with zero consequences….

Representative Keshel … drove home the bottom line: “The taxpayers are on the hook when there’s a lawsuit against DCS. What are we paying out of our pockets to defend this?”

The answer — millions upon millions — clearly landed with the committee…. The takeaway was unmistakable: Arizona’s family courts and child welfare system have been running as a “billion-dollar racket”, but the jig is up. With candor and concrete data, Moore helped pull back the curtain, giving reformers a roadmap to start cleaning house.

Killer Family Courts: Raw Testimonies

Perhaps the most searing moments came from Arizona parents and grandparents themselves — ordinary families who say they were crushed by the very system meant to protect them. One by one, they stepped forward to recount personal nightmares of abuse, retaliation, and official indifference….

Her voice cracking, [Mary] Betzel said the experience taught her that family court is “not about truth or children’s best interests — it’s about power and money.” Lawmakers shook their heads in dismay at her account of systemic betrayal….

The picture [Dean] Gensco painted was of a rogue agency that rides roughshod over families, with judges rubber-stamping whatever DCS wants. Finchem was visibly alarmed. “There’s a recurring theme here with DCS,” he noted — a theme of no transparency and no accountability”….

Nicole Skinner’s … story highlighted what many other parents at the hearing echoed: family courts don’t just fail to protect children, they actively shield insiders and powerful players while leaving protective parents bankrupt, endangered, and silenced….

Michael Bertrand … lifted his shirt slightly to show scars: “I have two feet of scar. I’m missing one of my internal organs, and three others are permanently damaged,” he said matter-of-factly…. He spoke of uncovering a “third-party gang” — essentially a domestic terrorist group — “operating under the protection of a written legal instrument of the Arizona Superior Court.” In other words, he believes corrupt insiders shielded a criminal outfit to help destroy him…. As wild as parts of his story sounded, no one in the room doubted one thing: this man had been put through hell by a system that lost all semblance of justice.

Killer Family Courts: Final Words

By the hearing’s end, dozens of other citizens had signed up to speak — a testament to the widespread outrage — but there was not enough time.

Rep. Keshel managed to squeeze in one last bombshell on the record: She relayed the case of an Arizona family whose five children were taken by Nevada’s child services. According to evidence Keshel cited, the two youngest (just 3 and 4 years old) were being “raped repeatedly” by foster parents, and the oldest, a 14-year-old girl, had gone missing under state care. “They have no idea where she is right now,” Keshel retorted, highlighting the interstate indifference the family faced….

Finchem adjourned the hearing [with the promise of a] formal report from the committee, [to] be issued within 15–21 days…. “We will not tolerate this any longer…. We’ve got a responsibility to take action”….

What happened in Arizona this week was more than a hearing; it felt like the first tremors of an earthquake that could shake family courts nationwide. For the first time in a long time, these parents and advocates see cracks forming in the once-untouchable system’s fortress…. The people have spoken, the truth is on record, and reform is on the horizon — for Kayden, for all our children.

(Read the full article here: https://luthmann.substack.com/p/killer-family-courts.)

*Please help us to impeach an archetypal Family Court judge, Jane Gallina-Mecca! She practices serial kidnapping and serial killing; traffics children to pedophilic sex rings and Satanic cults; and threatens, falsely arrests, and facilitates the murders of witnesses. You can find more information about her at ImpeachMecca.org, and detailed documentation on her evident mental unfitness and homicidality at AlanTChan.com.

[image error]

PRESS RELEASE — MOUNTING NATIONAL OUTRAGE OVER JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT BY JUDGE JANE GALLINA-MECCA

PRESS RELEASE — MOUNTING NATIONAL OUTRAGE OVER JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT BY JUDGE JANE GALLINA-MECCA

Critical Evidence Barred from the Judge’s Courtroom at AlanTChan.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Summary Video: The Unconscionable and Intolerable Story of What has been Done to Patricia Lee and Her Children

BERGEN COUNTY, NJ — Thousands of citizens nationwide are following the unfolding crisis surrounding Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca, widely described by advocates as one of the most abusive and corrupt judges currently on the bench. Her record has sparked outrage for consistent patterns of serious judicial abuse, ethical misconduct, and repeated disregard for constitutional rights.

One of the most urgent cases is that of Patricia Lee, her children, and her sister Dr. Bandy X. Lee, a world-renowned forensic psychiatrist. Despite years of efforts to protect her family, Patricia Lee has been trapped in a system that methodically denies her due process. Judge Gallina-Mecca holds secret hearings in Patricia Lee’s absence, withholds audio recordings and transcripts from her, and even fails to notify her of life-changing decisions made about her in her absence. These include her custody, divorce, and eviction trials, and most recently the hearing that authorized her removal by force.

These actions have produced catastrophic results: Patricia Lee’s abusive ex-husband, a violent criminal and twice-federally-adjudicated financial fraudster, has been awarded sole custody, child support, all marital assets, his legal fees, the marital home, and even control of Patricia Lee’s life insurance policy. Eviction from her residence of 10 years is now imminent — despite medical evidence that displacement could be life-threatening.

This case illustrates a broader pattern of judicial misconduct that has devastated countless families across New Jersey. Public demand for accountability is rising sharply, with more than 3,000 petitioners calling for Judge Gallina-Mecca’s impeachment.

Dr. Lee has most recently testified before legislatures in Arizona and Idaho, warning of the dangers of unchecked judicial authority and its devastating impact on children, families, and public trust in our justice system. Judge Gallina-Mecca has responded by attempting to silence her under threat of contempt, fines, and imprisonment — flagrantly violating core First Amendment protections.

Resources:
· Arizona Testimony of Dr. Lee
· Idaho Testimony of Dr. Lee
· ImpeachMecca.org
· AlanTChan.com

Only public outcry can save Patricia Lee and her children from her murderously violent, extremely abusive, and diagnosed psychopathic former husband, whom Judge Gallina-Mecca is protecting and enriching. For this reason, a special website detailing his dangerousness and publicizing the evidence that was barred from Judge Gallina-Mecca’s courtroom, as well as more reasons for the impeachment of a blatantly corrupt judge who has caused immense harm, has been set up at AlanTChan.com.

Media Contact:
Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div.
BandyLee.com
Phone: 917–328–2492
Email: bandy@bandylee.com

[image error]

Protective Order Abuses beyond the Pale

A Case Even Worse than That of Evelyn Nissirios

BREAKING: NYPD Detective Wilkinson Caught on Tape Admitting to Obstruction of Justice: “I Get Whatever I Want” From Judges Because of DA McMahon

The recording that rocked Staten Island: A detective admits the DA’s name is a golden ticket for felony charges — no due process needed.

July 30, 2025

By Frank Parlato

Detective John Wilkinson claims to carry the Richmond County judges in his pocket like so many nickels and dimes.

A Recording the DA May Not Want You to Hear

On July 21, 2025, NYPD Detective John Wilkinson spoke with attorney Lawrence Almagno. The conversation lasted three minutes.

But it exposed a rigged and illegal warrant operation tied to Staten Island District Attorney Michael McMahon.

It will be trouble for somebody — and likely not the target of the warrant.

In a recorded call, Det. Wilkinson tells the attorney that he is the case detective for a criminal contempt charge against journalist Richard Luthmann.

The complaining witness?

“It’s the Staten Island DA,” Wilkinson says.

“McMahon?,” Almagno replies.

“Yep,” Wilkinson confirms.

Then Wilkinson drops the line that changes everything.

“With the victim who it is… I get whatever I want.”

He means he will get what he wants from a judge. He means he will get the warrant signed no matter how false it is.

DA McMahon swore out a warrant as a victim claiming he was scared for his safety/life and that Luthmann was a “stranger” to him.

Both are likely perjury and the latter claim provably so.

Det. Wilkinson continues, “I ask for X, I get it. I ask for Z, I get it.”

Audio Player

What was X or Z ? A felony arrest warrant. And the use of U.S. Marshals to extradite Luthmann from Florida. Over what?

Luthmann sent McMahon, along with 33,000 other subscribers an automatically generated newsletter. It went to McMahon’s public email address. The email did not mention McMahon. It was written by Dr. Bandy Lee about a New Jersey judge. It contained no threats.

There is an unsubscribe button on the email, if McMahon wanted to get no more emails.

Instead McMahon, a long time political adversary Luthmann’s, said he was afraid for his life/safety.

This is not just a clown show. An innocent man’s liberty is at stake. This is classic racketeering led by McMahon with co-conspirator Wilkinson.

These two men must be insane to think they can get away with this — and bootstrap the US Marshalls into this — making it a federal racketerring case.

The Email That Triggered a Felony Warrant

On July 13, 2025, Luthmann’s Substack newsletter — This is For Real — sent out a post authored by psychiatrist Dr. Bandy X. Lee. The article discussed political psychology and mental health in public officials. It didn’t mention McMahon. It contained no threats.

Still, McMahon filed a criminal complaint, claiming he feared for his safety/life.

Luthmann NYPD Report 1

Luthmann NYPD Report 2

Luthmann NYPD Report 3

Staten Island District Attorney Michael E McMahon and NYS Attorney General Letitia James She may be called on to investigate him before this is over

Substack records show he had voluntarily subscribed to, read, and clicked on links in the newsletter for weeks. And yet he used the arrival of a singular email in his inbox at 10:51 am on a Sunday morning as a pretext for a criminal case. But he waited 24 hours before making the complaint — despite his claim he feared for his safety/life.

Wilkinson made clear the charge would be elevated. “Criminal contempt is charged as a felony,” he told Almagno. He acknowledged that contempt isn’t always a felony, but said plainly, “We, PD is gonna charge the felony.”

We know who Wilkinson is taking orders from.

We will know his station in life may change if he is charged with racketeering. He will be taking orders from someone other than McMahon and it may be within the gates of the US Bureau of Prisons.

This is serious felony conduct and Wilkinson has admitted it on tape.

He says he controls the judges in Richmond County- he and/or McMahon.

There are other troubling issues with this warrant. There is no evidence that Luthmann was ever served with an order of protection. No hearing. No notice. Just a claim and a detective ready to “do my thing.”

When Wilkinson executes this warrant, he signs a warrant on himself and McMahon.

This is hardly a joke.

The Fix Was In from the Start

Wilkinson also revealed that a special prosecutor would be assigned after the arrest. “There will be. Of course. We know that,” Wilkinson said, brushing off the procedural order of operations.

He offered to delay a few days before obtaining the warrant, but reiterated that the wheels were already turning. “It was going to be this week… I was going to get an arrest warrant and do my thing.”

The timing is telling. McMahon is under fire from Luthmann and others for past corruption, including Special Narcotics Part N court manipulation of criminal warrants and ties to political insiders. Prosecuting Luthmann would silence a critic and send a message to others. It worked before in 2018.

Staten Island Judge Charles Troia

If a warrant was signed against you in 2017 or 2018 by Staten Island Judge Charles Troia Chances are your civil rights were violated

This isn’t just a rogue detective making a loose comment. Detective Wilkinson brags he can “ensure” a judge signs his warrant. He’s not describing a lawful process. He’s describing a setup. The whole point of the Fourth Amendment is to stop law enforcement from acting like judge, jury, and executioner.

Wilkinson cut out the middleman — the neutral magistrate — and replaced it with a rubber stamp he claims to control.

Either Wilkinson lied — which is bad — or he told the truth, which is worse. If he can guarantee a warrant gets signed, we’re looking at collusion, institutional rot, and a mockery of due process. That warrant isn’t legal.

It’s a blueprint for obstruction of justice, civil rights violations, and fraud on the court. And if no one investigates it, then the rot isn’t just Wilkinson — it’s the whole system that lets him talk like that and still carry a badge.

Staten Island’s Justice System on Trial

The bigger question is how far this rot goes. Wilkinson made no secret that the fix was in: judges would comply, warrants would be issued, and the case would go forward, regardless of merit.

That places the Staten Island judiciary in the crosshairs, especially administrative Judge Raymond Rodriguez. In filed court documents, Luthmann accused Rodriguez of being too close to McMahon and of rubber-stamping politically motivated prosecutions. Rodriguez hasn’t recused himself.

Judge Judith McMahon (the DA’s wife) with her “friend of three decades,” Administrative Judge Raymond Rodriguez

Judge Judith McMahon the DAs wife with her friend of three decades Administrative Judge Raymond Rodriguez

The recording, now submitted to NYPD Internal Affairs and the NYC Department of Investigation, may be the first domino. If Wilkinson’s statements are true, Staten Island’s Warrant Squad operates more like a political enforcement unit than a law enforcement agency.

“If this can happen to me,” Luthmann said, “it can happen to anyone who criticizes the McMahons or their allies.”

A felony arrest over an email newsletter? A case built on an unsubscribed public document? And a detective who thinks the DA’s name is a blank check?

Thanks to a recording that was never meant to be public, we know how it works.

[image error]

Testimony to the Idaho Legislature, Part 2

My Rebuttal to “Criticisms” that Consist of Typical Tropes Used to Enable Family Court Violence

When I first became aware of Family Court atrocities, I wondered how it was possible that such widespread violence of such magnitude could be so understated, in either academic or activist circles. I soon learned that, since Family Courts and their ancillary “beneficiaries” are fiercely protecting illegitimate profits, they will pursue, persecute, and attempt to eliminate anyone with any potential to expose them. This includes trying to discredit and defame me. I was offered an opportunity to rebut a criticism of me presented to the Idaho legislature, which I did briefly in my letter, below, with more extensive annotations against the original letter, far below:

Dear Honorable Members of the 2025 Idaho Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force:

I have been most grateful for your responsiveness to the troubling and obviously pervasive pattern of rampant Family Court abuses, which have risen to the level of a national emergency.

Ordinarily, I do not respond directly to criticisms of my work or testimony, but I will do so in Dr. Y.A.’s case, not specifically but as illustrative of a deep-seated culture and pattern that mimics domestic violence and abuse, of which I have claimed Family Courts are an “industry”.

First, the defensiveness, the sheer length of argument, and the ad hominem attacks should reveal that it is not a typical scholarly response. The attempt to overwhelm the opposition with false information, to attack the credibility of messengers (namely, truth tellers), and to project one’s own behavior onto others is rather behavior commonly seen with abusers. Family Court defenders should know that gaslighting, coercion, intimidation, and diversionary tactics when their “optics” are threatened is not a valid way to do “science”.

I did not start out with Family Court reform. My area of expertise is general violence prevention, using a public health approach, and I have spent most of my career in criminal justice reform. I have authored over 100 scientific articles and chapters, in publications as prestigious as the Annals of the New York Academy of Science. I am a scholar, practitioner, and policy advisor — but above all an outraged human being. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is something very wrong in the Family Court world that shocks the conscience. I therefore speak directly to the human rights violations, child murders, loving parents’ suicides, and the coverup of what is essentially a child slave auction that is going on in the so-called “Family Courts.”

My personal glimpse into the practices, through my own sister’s divorce in Bergen County, New Jersey, was essential, because of the tightly-guarded secrecy of the Family Courts. If not, there would not have been a way for me to know: Family Courts use their insider knowledge to “fix” their cases and to create a semblance of following evidence, when bias, conflicts of interest, and incestuous selection of “experts” and the creation of nonexistent “science” is endemic practice. “Parental alienation syndrome” has been discredited repeatedly over four decades but continues to have a life of its own because of Family Court demand.

If I had to explain what “parental alienation” theory is, I would define it as a reinterpretation of existing, well-established science to assert the opposite. It serves the purpose of denying real child abuse and buttressing the perpetrator’s wishful thinking that he (or she) is the victim and not the offender. But this is criminal psychopathology, which should be treated as such and contained, not encouraged and “serviced”, as in Family Court, for up to 175 billion dollars in profit per year.

This is the reason I rely on death statistics. Family Courts aggressively guard their secrecy so that scientifically-rigorous outcome studies and investigative reporting are virtually impossible, but the sheer number of deaths that they produce, or the conditions ripe for murders and suicides that they coerce, make it obvious for anyone who cares to look.

I deliberately avoid using well-worn language, so that people can have a fresh look without the filters, but the data I am speaking to are from well-known, credible sources. I also wish to state that it is typical for Family Court proponents to attack the United Nations special rapporteur, the Center for Judicial Excellence, and the Leadership Council, but these are tremendous sources of excellent scholarship, admirable raw data collection against the odds, and a clearinghouse for existing scientific research, respectively. The reason why Justice USA started a comprehensive survey in all fifty U.S. states, and invited me to analyze the data, is because of the paucity of research that is available from the secretive Family Courts.

They also obstruct: the attacks against scholars, counter-reports to discredit influential reports, and generation of noise, presenting pseudoscience for obfuscation, is not science. It is much like the attacks against journalists that have occurred, such as Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca of New Jersey, who has also been written up in the Washington Post for ordering news outlets to “unpublish immediately” fact-checked articles that expose inconvenient truths.

I am disturbed that there is not just a cottage industry of poorly-trained “experts” favored by Family Courts, but now a seeming industry of so-called “scholars” who churn out publications but on close scrutiny do not hold up to scientific standards at all. For this, I would simply say: follow the money.

In summary, Family Courts have been enormously harmful to society, and I maintain that the corrupt culture it engenders is not conducive to reform from within, which has been tried for decades without success.

Respectfully submitted,

Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div.

—

Here is my more detailed rebuttal, in annotations:

To the honorable members of the 2025 Idaho Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force:

My name is Yaakov Aichenbaum. I have coauthored three scholarly works concerning misinformation about parental alienation and I have consulted and provided testimony on this topic in many states, the United States Mission to the UN Human Rights Council, the British House of Lords and more. I commend your committee’s charge to improve the family court system. It should be evident that meaningful change should only be based upon scientific and substantiated factual information and not upon unsubstantiated anecdotal accounts and emotional appeals that ignore solid science.

Unfortunately, many advocates in the domestic violence community (even those with robust credentials) have created a false narrative to promote legislative change and these advocates engage in a science denial campaign to advance their agenda. Likewise, some litigants whose cases were not decided in their favor assume the title of “protective parent” and place unjustified blame on the family court system.

Anecdotal claims and scholarly citations need to be vetted for their validity.

This esteemed committee heard the testimony of Ms. Bandy Lee at the June 7th hearing. Ms. Lee presented an extensive list of qualifications and accomplishments and she emotionally described her own personal experiences in family courts. Based upon similar representations in AZ, AZ Senator Finchem expressed his approval of her testimony and granted Ms. Lee a considerable extended time when she similarly testified at the AZ hearing. However, if we scrutinize Ms. Lee’s testimony, we will see that her testimony contained considerable misinformation and disinformation. In fact, Ms. Lee is very much part of the aforementioned science denial campaign.

First, it should be noted that even though Ms. Lee certainly has considerable experience with domestic violence victims, her accomplishments do not indicate that she has knowledge or qualifications to render scientific opinions about shared parenting research, parental alienation, and parent child conflict issues. In fact, the questionable sources she cites indicate that she is not proficient in these issues.

Nevertheless, she (like Senator Finchem) declared that parental alienation is a pseudoscience that has been rejected by the scientific community. Lee fails to mention that:

· The 2022 American Psychological Association’s Guidelines for Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings (https://www.apa.org/about/policy/child-custody-evaluations.pdf) mentions over 20 times the importance of addressing alienation. It also mentions the importance of input from experts from diverse areas of specialties and the importance of differentiating between valid and false allegations of all types.

· Kaplan and Sadock’s Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, Tenth Edition, discusses parental alienation as a form of child maltreatment on page 3829.

· The AFCC and NCJFCJ issued a Joint Statement on Parent-Child Contact Problems in 2022 which says that parental alienation and false allegations are factors that should be taken into consideration in custody decisions (https://www.afccnet.org/Resource-Center/Center-for-

Excellence-in-Family-Court-Practice/afcc-and-ncjfcj-joint-statement-on-parent-child-contact- problems).

·

Authors of the DSM-5 chapter on “Other Conditions” explain that prenatal alienation is included in the DSM-5 under the diagnosis of Child Affected by Parental Relationship Distress (code V61.29). (https://www.jaacap.org/article/S0890-8567(16)30175-7/fulltext)

· A study found that the concept of PA was found to be material, probative, relevant and admissible in at least 1181 US appellate court cases between 1985 and 2018 (https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-3...).

Certain domestic violence advocates have engaged in a science denial campaign to discredit parental alienation science. They claim that parental alienation is a deception that abusive fathers use to deflect domestic violence allegations. They call parental alienation junk science. Kayden’s Law was written with this intent and it is designed to prevent any possibility of parental alienation claims being admissible in court. Unfortunately, people sometimes make false allegations of alienation just like they sometimes make false allegations of domestic violence. Instead of collaborating to address all forms of abuse and developing protocols to identify false allegations of all kinds, certain domestic violence advocates have chosen to try to discredit the whole science of alienation. Regrettably, as the science of alienation has developed, the science denial tactics of these critics have increased.

Kayden’s Law is being promoted by advocates who have a long history of denying established science and misleading policymakers. They will no doubt tell you about a study from George Washington University and other “research” that shows that parental alienation is pseudoscience and is misused in court. They will not, however, share with you the weakness and/or outright fraud of these studies. This is documented in The Illusory Correlation Between Parental Alienation and Other Forms of Family Violence (Varavei & Harman, 2024. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijsw.12692).

I was part of an international team of researchers and clinicians that wrote three books which expose the vast misinformation and public policy deception that is espoused by many of the stakeholders who are promoting Kayden’s Law across the country, including Idaho. To date, the perpetrators of this misinformation have offered no rebuttal other than more ad hominem attacks and further science denial tactics. The books are available at:

· Child Safety First Report: https://bit.ly/3t5VuYx (Lee referenced this study from the Center for Judicial Excellence in her testimony)

· Challenging Parental Alienation: https://bit.ly/3NnYMgp

· Report of UN Special Rapporteur on parental alienation: https://bit.ly/3GHbgMG

Ms. Lee mentioned the Report of UN Special Rapporteur on parental alienation in her testimony. However, she failed to mention that this report is not the official policy of the UN Human Rights Council; rather, it was an unscientific report that was presented to the HRC and was subsequently critiqued for its many flaws at the link above.

Ms. Lee’s testimony was more benign in her Idaho testimony than in other states. In AZ she also accused the AFCC (the most prestigious US organization of judges, attorneys, mental health providers and more)

of being in collusion to highjack the family court system for monetary benefits. This science denial tactic conspiracy theory is preposterous and an afront to the many dedicated judges and other professionals who work in this very difficult field.

In AZ, Ms. Lee related that she is almost always excluded from providing testimony in family courts (see https://bandyxlee.medium.com/testimony-to-the-arizona-senate-de6013ea7be2 ). She opines the reason for this is the corruption of the family courts and their intransigence to permit Ms. Lee to expose this corruption. Ms. Lee does not entertain the possibility that her testimony is excluded because she lacks the necessary credentials to be an expert witness on areas of parental alienation, child custody and shared parenting and that she is outspoken in her misinformation as we will shortly see.

In Idaho, Lee cited various dubius studies and far-fetched facts:

Lee stated that if child abuse is alleged or suspected, custody is transferred, sometimes immediately, to the abuser (Silberg and Dallam, 2019). According to some studies, this happens up to three-quarters of the time (Leadership Council, 2023), but in my experience it has happened 98 percent of the time.

Silberg’s study is a very weak and controversial study. The Leadership Council is an advocacy group and does not conduct peer reviewed research that is reliable. It is also preposterous to think that when there is a concern of child abuse that in 98% of cases custody is transferred to the abuser.

Lee also cites Project Justice USA, which is a grassroots advocacy group that conducted an unscientific survey that is fraught with many biases, contradictions, and unscientific practices.

In other states Lee testified that:

A vast majority of contested custody cases are actually domestic violence cases involving the most dangerous individuals.

FACTCHECK: This is widely claimed by the DV community, but I know of no source for the claim. Advocate (and author of Kayden’s Law) Danielle Pollack frequently quotes this in her testimony from {(Jaffe, P., Zerwer & Poisson, Access Denied: The Barriers of Violence & Poverty for Abused Women and their Children After Separation (citing four studies, all of which found 70–75% of cases in litigation involved allegations of domestic violence)}, but this source does not mention this at all!

· Many fathers involved in contested custody cases kill their children, such that almost 20% of the nation’s child murders by parent have been the result of placement by the family courts (Center for Judicial Excellence, 2022).

FACTCHECK: The data from the Center for Judicial Excellence was not computed in a scientific manner. It has been greatly criticized in Child Safety First Report: https://bit.ly/3t5VuYx. This statement also demonstrates the logical fallacy known as baseline neglect.

· More than 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised custody by their physical or sexual abuser following divorce in the United States (Silberg, 2008).

FACTCHECK: This figure was not based upon any empirical research. It was released by Silberg in a press release and has no factual basis. Its flaws are discussed in Child Safety First Report: https://bit.ly/3t5VuYx.

· In a disproportionate number of cases, the “protective parent” — usually the primary attachment figure for the children — loses custody.

FACTCHECK: This is based upon a study by advocate Joan Meier. This study has been widely criticized for research fraud and has failed replication at least three times.

A careful reading will demonstrate that Ms. Lee’s testimony (like that of many other advocates in the domestic violence community are presenting to legislatures) is fraught with science denial tactics such as attributing nefarious intent, conspiracy theories, slippery slope arguments, logical fallacies and more. I urge this committee to carefully scrutinize advocates like Ms. Lee and not take their word as gospel just because they have impressive credentials.

Family courts do need reform, better evidence-based practices and training. In our rush to improve the system, we must nevertheless be careful not to take rash and unjustified actions that accepts science denial tactics and lets emotional appeals override fact checking. Without careful deliberation and consideration of all expert opinions, Idaho children will be harmed in our efforts to protect them.

Yours,

Yaakov Aichenbaum Baltimore, MD

info@childsafetyfirstreport.com

https://www.childsafetyfirstreport.com/

[image error]

‘Molested by My Father, the Chief of Police’ — And Family Court Kept Her There

‘Molested by My Father, the Chief of Police’ — And Family Court Kept Her There

Child Sex Trafficking, Satanic Rituals, and the Depths of Human Depravity — All are Found in the Family Courts

Earlier this year, an explosive interview by the above title shook the Family Court world. Instead of rescuing children from abuse, Family Courts typically tie the protective parents’ (usually the mothers’) hands, force the children to be kept with their abusers, and help abusers cover up their abuse. This is what happens to almost 100,000 new children per year, year after year, resulting in immense injury and harm. The details of this case vividly illustrate why the public remains in the dark about the most unspeakable forms of child torture and child trafficking; why survivors can hardly speak about what has happened to them for decades, if not for life; and how Family Courts take advantage of the utter unbelievability of the atrocities they facilitate. Therefore, when an incredibly brave young voice arises so credibly and so compellingly as Courtney Tamagny, we must, as a society, believe and respond — for the odds she has overcome to come forward are immeasurable (not only is it psychologically hard, Family Courts aggressively threaten and destroy witnesses and whistleblowers, such that it is terrifying to do so). Yet, absolute secrecy and absolute impunity are what enable these utterly dark worlds of child exploitation to flourish. This is why breaking the silence is so important.

Daughter of NJ police chief accuses him, others of ‘ritualistic’ abuse, years of sexual assault: court docs

By Priscilla DeGregory and Alex Oliveira

Published July 10, 2025

The daughter of a New Jersey police chief claims he repeatedly raped her for more than a decade as part of a “ritualistic” cult allegedly involving their neighbors, according to a shocking lawsuit she filed.

Courtney Tamagny’s allegations against Leonia Police Chief Scott Tamagny, his neighbor Kevin Slevin and others have starkly divided the small Bergen County borough. Both men say that the claims were thoroughly investigated as high as the federal government and determined to be unfounded.

Slevin has even countersued Courtney for defamation.

But Courtney has taken her claims public — appearing on podcasts and social media to describe the alleged sex abuse in detail, and sparking a Change.org petition to suspend her top cop dad.

The 20-year-old claims her father and Slevin heinously abused her in their home, alongside “ritualistic” worshippers in the woods near their house — and that the father allegedly threatened to murder her mother if she ever spoke up, according to court docs.

“[Courtney was brought] into the woods in Rockland County New York, and there was what appeared to be other middle-aged men present with masks on their faces,” the lawsuit claimed. “She recalls there being fire and animals being burned, and they would chant as if ritualistic.”

“She was sexually assaulted in those woods by defendant Slevin, defendant father, and some of the other men present,” it further claimed.

The alleged abuse began in 2009 when Courtney was around 4 years old, with the lawsuit claiming it continued until 2020, when she was 15.

Both of Courtney’s sisters were also allegedly subjected to abuse, according to the lawsuit, with their father allegedly using drugs to sedate them before assaulting them when their mother was either away or asleep with earplugs in a downstairs bedroom.

The mother, Jeanne Tamagny, joined Courtney as a plaintiff on the lawsuit and is in the process of divorcing her husband.

Courtney also claims she suppressed memories of the abuse for years as a survival tactic, and that she only began recalling them after a visit to a doctor for genital pain.

The doctor asked her if she had been sexually abused, which brought back flashbacks, the suit claims.

Her therapist eventually reported the abuse to authorities in 2022, the court papers say.

She described those alleged memories in detail on the podcast “We’re All Insane” in April, claiming that generations of her father’s “bloodline” had been in a satanic cult alongside numerous neighbors in their North Jersey town — and that they ritualistically raped her and her siblings, and even allegedly trafficked children and burned them alive in their local woods.

Courtney claimed on the podcast that the neighborhood cultists had “tunnels” they would use to covertly operate their rituals, which allegedly included “taking kids’ blood,” “drum circles” and “burnings” that would last all night.

Courtney appeared on the podcast “We’re All Insane” and claimed a North Jersey cult was abusing trafficked children

“Burnings of animals, animal skins, humans as well,” she said on the show, claiming that much of the alleged violence was intended to terrify victims into silence.

“What scared us the most is ‘OK, we’re doing this to these people we’ve trafficked, why wouldn’t we do this to you? Because we just did that to this young girl or this young boy,’” she continued to relay on the episode, adding that the alleged cult was part of a national cabal of satanists engaged in child trafficking.

Other alleged cult activities she outlined on the podcast included sick “games” that always ended with kids being assaulted.

“We would go into the woods, and we would play ‘games’ which were not games,” she claimed on the show, describing something supposedly called “Hunter and Gatherers” where upward of 10 kids were released into the woods and allowed to hide — and then cult members would allegedly chase them down, incapacitate them and assault them.

“They made it as if it was a game and you could win,” she claimed on the show. “You weren’t going to win, you were always going to be hit, they just wanted you to look terrified and run.”

Courtney also claimed on the podcast that her father used his position in local law enforcement to trap her in a world of abuse, and that anytime she reached out for help, she was rebuffed.

In addition to suing her father and Slevin, Courtney also named the Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office, the State of New Jersey, various state child protective services and others.

Chief Tamagny and Slevin have both vehemently denied the claims.

“It’s made up out of whole cloth,” Slevin’s attorney, Kevin Corriston, told The Post. “This entire complaint was previously investigated by everybody from Homeland Security, to the Attorney General’s Office in New Jersey, to the Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office, and they found no basis at all for these outrageous allegations.

“Having got no satisfaction from law enforcement, she now decided to sue all the people who were involved in the investigation,” Corriston continued.

“These claims are on their face unbelievable. There is no way in the world that there was some sort of secret satanic child sex cult operating out of Riverdale, New Jersey. This is a fantasy made up in her mind,” he said, adding that Courtney’s allegations are “remarkably similar” to the plots in several books and movies in particular.

Slevin’s countersuit accuses Courtney of defamation, claiming her allegations have left him “exposed to public ridicule and held in disrepute,” and “extreme embarrassment and humiliation and severe mental distress.”

Chief Tamagny’s attorney shared similar sentiments, calling the allegations “completely false and defamatory.”

*Please help us to impeach Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca  — a judge involved in the above case. You can find more information at: ImpeachMecca.org . A full-page advertisement ran in a Bergen County, NJ, local newspaper, as below — and more are forthcoming!

[image error]

Testimony to the Idaho Legislature

By Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div., for the Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force

*Idaho is the first of a half-dozen states that will duplicate Arizona’s groundbreaking hearings, whieh are rippling through the nation. The video recording of Dr. Lee’s and Ariz. Sen. Mark Finchem’s testimonies is far below.

My name is Bandy Lee, and I am from New York City. I am a forensic psychiatrist and violence expert. I have 25 years of experience serving as an expert witness in approximately 200 criminal and civil court cases around the country, of which about 50 were in family courts across 22 states. I am also president of the World Mental Health Coalition and cofounder of the Violence Prevention Institute. I was a research fellow of the National Institute of Mental Health, and taught at Yale School of Medicine and Yale Law School for 17 years before joining the Harvard Program in Psychiatry and the Law in 2021. In 2002, I helped the World Health Organization launch its landmark publication, The World Report on Violence and Health. In 2007, I helped coauthor the United Nations Secretary-General’s chapter on “Violence against Children.” I am a recipient of the National Research Service Award and author of the textbook, Violence (Lee, 2019), as well as of over 100 scientific articles and chapters on violence prevention. For clinical practice, I work in maximum-security prisons and specialize in treating violent offenders. I have worked with multiple city and state governments, as well as the U.S. Senate, on criminal justice reform and on implementing alternatives to solitary confinement. On family courts, I have testified before the legislatures of Arizona, Colorado, New York, Louisiana, Tennessee, Washington, and I am now very pleased to be in Idaho.

When I became aware of the situation in family courts, I had had two decades of serving as an expert witness in criminal and civil courts. I may never have learned about family courts but for my sister’s divorce in Bergen County, New Jersey, under a judge who is currently being referred for impeachment (M. B., 2024). Family courts, as a rule, operate under strict secrecy and do not like qualified experts — especially those who are independent. Therefore, I had no previous experience that could have prepared me for the family courts.

Yale Law School’s Robert Cover said: “Interpretations in law … constitute justifications for violence” (Cover, 1986). Nowhere does this seem truer than in family courts, and nowhere is the application more arbitrary, unjust, and unnecessary.

Family court judges were granted almost unlimited discretion with the law so that they might exercise benevolence (Spinak, 2023). However, without transparency and accountability, they have become some of the most powerful members of society exploiting the most vulnerable and powerless — and their courtrooms have become veritable centers of human rights violations (Silverman et al., 2004). Much like the prison system, which is another secret institution that conducts its affairs behind concrete walls with little oversight, brutality and violence flourish in the family court system behind court seals and judicial immunity (Stengel, 2011). Indeed, the combination of near-unlimited discretion behind closed doors and immunity are a deadly mix.

It must be noted how prevalent family violence is: 1 in 2.5 women and 1in 4 men experience physical violence from an intimate partner in their lifetime (Leemis et al., 2022). 1 in 4 children experience child physical abuse or neglect in their lifetime (Brown et al., 2023). Over half of female homicide victims are killed by a current or former male intimate partner (Jack et al., 2018), and more children die at the hands of their parents than any other relationship (Stöckl et al., 2017). It is therefore unsurprising that a vast majority of contested custody cases are actually family violence cases involving some of the most dangerous individuals in society. To deny — or worse, to exploit — family violence for profit can therefore be very dangerous.

In 1997, it was found that abusive fathers are more than twice as likely to fight for exclusive custody of their children than non-abusive fathers (Smith and Coukos, 1997), but the numbers are likely much higher now. Once granted custody, many go on to kill under family court “support” (Bartlow, 2017; Goldstein, 2013), such that almost 1 in 8 of the nation’s child murders by parent could be reduced if family courts had no role (Center for Judicial Excellence, 2025; Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2025). The problem has been worsening over time, although the exact numbers cannot be known, as routine record concealment makes it virtually impossible to track the true number of child murders family courts facilitate (Friedman, 2019). For every child murder, there are at least as many child suicides, and for every death hundreds of children are injured to the point of needing medical care.

Family courts label these cases as “high conflict,” but the actual situation is usually one-sided (Meier, 2023), with a criminally violent party using this “alternative” court system not only to escape prosecution but to “frame” the innocent victim (Summers, 2023). Indeed, by circumventing due process and placing the force of the law behind family violence, family courts have become centers where violent criminals can “DARVO” (“deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender”) (Freyd, 1997).

How does this happen? First, if child abuse is alleged or suspected, custody is transferred, sometimes immediately, to the abuser (Silberg and Dallam, 2019). According to some studies, this happens up to three-quarters of the time (Leadership Council, 2023), but in my experience it has happened 98 percent of the time. I will use my sister as an example, but the methods are astonishingly consistent across the country (Project Justice USA, 2025). My sister was on her authorized weekend to be with her children, and suddenly five policemen raided her and seized her children, based on a court order that was issued without warning or due process. She was not even given a reason for the first two years — and, now, four years later, she has still not seen or heard from them.

When she learned from academic and pediatric reports that they were missing almost half of school and ceased to grow even one inch in four years — which is extreme failure to thrive — she was rather barred from her constitutional right to their records. In her case, she did not even report child abuse. The children simply kicked, screamed, and tried to commit suicide rather than go to their father, who almost killed each of them by head injury. Yet, he now has sole, exclusive custody, and no prior adult who cared for them can have access to them. Once family court is involved, Child Protective Services must fall in line (Fonta and Maguire-Jack, 2015), the state registry is often blocked (or the number of professionals making reports does not matter), and police officers must follow orders (officers are often puzzled as to why they were dispatched in large numbers to an unarmed, loving mother simply parenting her children, as in the above case, at the same time as being ordered not to intervene in some of the most clear-cut cases involving evidence of egregious abuse; mental health professionals, also as front-line mandated reporters, encounter the same dilemma).

As shocking as my sister’s case sounds, it still counts among the milder ones I have seen, while serving as an expert witness in approximately 50 family court cases, evaluating all family members, and examining all the evidence. The effort it takes to get a child to the right parent is often insurmountable — in that almost no amount of evidence is enough, and no number of professionals warning is enough. Many loving parents are also professionally and financially ruined, charged exorbitant fees for evaluations, therapy, and supervised visits — and almost nothing gets their children back (Bassi et al., 2025). And when they cannot pay the “child support” and their abuser’s legal fees, they can be incarcerated (Cozzolino, 2018).

Transferring custody thus allows the perpetrator to conceal his abuse, as well as to achieve the goal of “tangential spouse abuse,” that is, abusing the children to torture the spouse (Stark, 2023). In my sister’s case, she experienced ten near-death episodes from stress, and went from superior functioning as a former high-level government executive to requiring round-the-clock, 24-hour care after an intensive care unit admission.

I have seen courts and court appointees seek out “pseudo-concepts” (United Nations, 2023) to try to justify these abrupt custody transfers, and this is where “parental alienation” and “reunification” come in (Meier, 2020). Family courts have essentially produced opportunities for an entire industry of theories and methods unheard of outside of family court (Saunders et al., 2011). Reunification camps can charge up to $40,000 for five days in a run-down motel (Hansen, 2022), and I have personally seen a master’s-level, so-called “expert” charge $500,000 for a fraudulent report, labeling the healthy, loving parent “mentally ill,” after just 15 minutes of interview, and then permanently removing the child on that basis — a widespread practice (Emery et al., 2005).

When there is child abuse, the most critical mitigating factor is the loving, protective parent (Cicchetti and Toth, 2005), but contact with that parent is often severed for many years if not for one’s entire childhood. The oxymoronic “reunification therapy” — usually done with an actively abusive parent — is contraindicated in regular mental health practice. These family court-confined practices maximize harm and not only embolden existing perpetrators but generate new ones, since roughly one-third of victimized children move on to become victimizers themselves (Kaufman and Zigler, 1987).

The public is unaware of this epidemic of violence occurring through the family courts, because judges threaten reporters and journalists to control their coverage. When a major magazine published an interview with me, the judge in my sister’s case issued an order for them immediately to “unpublish” the fact-checked article. When their legal department sternly rebuked her for violating the First Amendment, she rather returned to her drawing board and issued a second order! It turned out that even the Washington Post had shamed her 10 years ago for trying to order the takedown of another article (Volokh, 2015), but because of impunity, she remains undaunted, and her constitutional violations continue. The end result is that this magazine and others vow never to cover a family court story again.

It is no exaggeration to say that family courts are one of the deadliest places for women and children. Men can be victims as well. Family courts are a de facto “abuse industry,” annually bringing in an estimated 50 to 175 billion dollars (Berger, 2014) for sending almost 100,000 children a year (Silberg, 2008), year after year, to what psychologists call “soul murder” (Shengold, 1989). Countless loving mothers have also died prematurely (Thomas, 2023), without prior health conditions, or are beset with diseases seen nowhere else in medicine (Dalgarno, 2024). It is a serious public health problem that, unless immediately and profoundly reformed, will continue to cause great damage to our society and our collective future. Bold legislation that can set the standard for the entire country is greatly needed.

Dr. Bandy Lee before the Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force

(Video recording of Dr. Lee’s and Sen. Finchem’s testimonies: https://youtu.be/ZuXwW9UD03o.)

(There is a call to impeach the judge mentioned in Dr. Lee’s testimony, Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca: https://impeachmecca.org/.)

References

Bartlow, R. D. (2017). Judicial response to court-assisted child murders. Family and Intimate Partner Violence Quarterly, 10(1), 7–54.

Bassi, S., Johnson, F., and Logan, L. (2025, June 2). California’s brewing kids-for-cash scheme: Parents pay hundreds to see their own children while unregulated industry profits from family court orders. Davis Vanguard. https://davisvanguard.org/2025/06/parents-pay-hundreds-supervised-visits-california/

Berg, M. T., Rogers, E. M., and Rochford, H. (2024). Perpetrator characteristics and firearm use in pediatric homicides: Supplementary Homicide Reports — United States, 1976 to 2020. Injury Epidemiology, 11(1), 37.

Berger, P. (2014). Divorce is big business. Hawaii Business, 60(2), 173.

Brown, C. L., Yilanli, M., and Rabbitt, A. L. (2023). Child Physical Abuse and Neglect. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls.

Center for Judicial Excellence (2025). U.S. Divorce Child Murder Data. San Rafael, CA: Center for Judicial Excellence. https://centerforjudicialexcellence.org/cje-projects-initiatives/child-murder-data/

Cicchetti, D., and Toth, S. L. (2005). Child maltreatment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1(1), 409–438.

Cover, R. M. (1986). Violence and the Word. Yale Law Journal, 95, 1601–1629.

Cozzolino, E. A. (2018). Parents on Trial: Jailing for Child Support Nonpayment. Austin, TX: University of Texas.

Dalgarno, E., Ayeb-Karlsson, S., Bramwell, D., Barnett, A., and Verma, A. (2024). Health-related experiences of family court and domestic abuse in England: A looming public health crisis. Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody and Child Development, 21(3), 277–305.

Emery, R. E., Otto, R. K., and O’Donohue, W. T. (2005). A critical assessment of child custody evaluations: Limited science and a flawed system. American Psychologist, 60(8), 887–902.

Fang, X., Brown, D. S., Florence, C. S., and Mercy, J. A. (2012). The economic burden of child maltreatment in the United States and implications for prevention. Child Abuse and Neglect, 36(2), 156–165.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (2025). Child Victimization, 2019–2023: Special Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-releases-child-victimization-2019-2023-special-report

Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., and Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258.

Fonta, S. A., and Maguire-Jack, K. (2015). Decision-making in Child Protective Services: Influences at multiple levels of the social ecology. Child Abuse and Neglect, 47, 70–82.

Freyd, J. J. (1997). Violations of power, adaptive blindness, and betrayal trauma theory. Feminism and Psychology, 7(1), 22–32.

Frosch, D. (2024, August 24). A Court-Ordered Therapy That Separates Kids From a Parent They Love Stirs a Backlash. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/us-news/reunification-therapy-custody-family-court-5b4e9279

Goldstein, B. (2013). What can be learned from court-assisted murder cases? Family and Intimate Partner Violence Quarterly, 5(4), 369–378.

Hansen, R. J. (2022, November 29). Reunification Camp Survivors Expose For-Profit Industry’s Relationship with Family Courts. Vanguard News Group. https://davisvanguard.org/2022/11/reunification-camp-survivors-expose-for-profit-industrys-relationship-with-family-courts/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Jack, S. P., Petrosky, E., Lyons, B. H., Blair, J. M., Ertl, A. M., Sheats, K. J., and Betz, C. J. (2018). Surveillance for violent deaths — National violent death reporting system, 27 states, 2015. MMWR Surveillance Summaries 67(SS-11):1–32.

Kaufman, J., and Zigler, E. (1987). Do abused children become abusive parents? American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57(2), 186–192.

Leadership Council (2025). Child Custody & Abuse / PAS. Baltimore, MD: Leadership Council. https://leadershipcouncil.org/child-custody-abuse-pas/

Lee, B. X. (2019). Violence: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Causes, Consequences, and Cures. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.

Leemis RW, Friar N, Khatiwada S, Chen MS, Kresnow M, Smith SG, Caslin S, & Basile KC. (2022). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2016/2017 Report on Intimate Partner Violence. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

M. B. (2024, June 19). Petition to Impeach Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca. Change.org. https://www.change.org/p/petition-to-impeach-judge-jane-gallina-mecca

Meier, J. S. (2020). U.S. child custody outcomes in cases involving parental alienation and abuse allegations: What do the data show? Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 42(1), 92–105.

Meier, J. S. (2023). History of Domestic Violence. Baltimore, MD: Leadership Council. https://leadershipcouncil.org/history-of-domestic-violence/

Project Justice USA (2025). Renowned Forensic Psychiatrist Dr. Bandy Lee and Constitutional Lawyer Bruce Fein Join Nationwide Family Court Reform Initiative. Boulder, CO: Project Justice USA. https://www.projectjusticeusa.com/renowned-forensic-psychiatrist-dr-bandy-lee-joins-nationwide-family-court-reform-initiative/

Resource Center on Domestic Violence: Child Protection and Custody (2025). Facts. Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. https://rcdvcpc.org/facts.html

Saunders, D. G., Faller, K. C., and Tolman, R. M. (2011). Child Custody Evaluators’ Beliefs about Domestic Abuse Allegations: Their Relationship to Evaluator Demographics, Background, Domestic Violence Knowledge and Custody-Visitation Recommendations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238891.pdf

Shengold, L. (1989). Soul Murder: The Effects of Childhood Abuse and Deprivation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Silberg, J. (2008). How Many Children Are Court-Ordered into Unsupervised Contact with an Abusive Parent after Divorce? Baltimore, MD: Leadership Council. https://leadershipcouncil.org/how-many-children-are-court-ordered/

Silberg, J., and Dallam, S. (2019). Abusers gaining custody in family courts: A case series of over turned decisions. Journal of Child Custody, 16(2), 140–169.

Silverman, J. G., Mesh, C. M., Cuthbert, C. V., Slote, K., and Bancroft, L. (2004). Child custody determinations in cases involving intimate partner violence: A human rights analysis. American Journal of Public Health, 94(6), 951–957.

Smith, R., and Coukos, P. (1997). Fairness and accuracy in evaluations of domestic violence and child abuse in custody determinations. Judges Journal, 36, 38.

Stark, E. (2023). Coercive Control of Children. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Stengel, T. M. (2011). Absolute judicial immunity makes absolutely no sense: An argument for an exception to judicial immunity. Temple Law Review, 84, 1071.

Stöckl, H., Dekel, B., Morris-Gehring, A., Watts, C., and Abrahams, N. (2017). Child homicide perpetrators worldwide: A systematic review. BMJ Paediatrics Open, 1(1), e000112.

Thomas, E. (2023, September 4). Family courts: Children forced into contact with fathers accused of abuse. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-66531409

United Nations (2023). Custody, Violence against Women and Violence against Children: Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls, Its Causes and Consequences, Reem Alsalem. New York, NY: United Nations. https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/ahrc5336-custody-violence-against-women-and-violence-against-children

Volokh, E. (2015, May 31). New Jersey judge orders newspaper to take down article. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/31/new-jersey-judge-orders-newspaper-to-take-down-article/

[image error]