How well has the Guardian ad litem worked for the state or for the people involved in a case? Are there problems with one Guardian ad litem or a Judge? No one knows because there is no public data showing where problems may be - so citizens of the state cannot make informed decisions about a Guardian ad litem. The Judicial Branch does not know and so they cannot correct problems with a Guardian ad litem, court or Judge.
In the past there was no opportunity to state whether the cost of a Guardian ad litem service was worth it. There was no opportunity to rate that service which had been provided. Any complaint or review would be through the courts and we have all seen just how effective that is in correcting any kind of problem. Or for letting consumers know what to expect.
That is until today.
There are two survey's that are being made available to those who have been influenced by a Guardian ad litem and the Judge that manages him/her. These survey's are short and you have the opportunity to add as much detail as you feel is necessary. While the Guardian ad litem name is asked the results for that person will not be displayed at this time. You do not have to give this persons name nor do you have to give your name. If you are interested in knowing whether a particular Guardian ad litem has been reviewed - that request can be emailed and some basic information can be provided as well as the names of others who have had an experience with that Guardian ad litem.
Thank you for taking the time to fill out one or both of these surveys. Please feel free to have family members, friends or others that were impacted by the Guardian ad litem recommendation(s) fill out the survey's.
NationalGALalert
Guardian ad litem Performance Survey
Guardian ad litem cost survey
For more information on Guardians ad litem please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or like us on Facebook for up to date information.
Monday, May 27, 2013
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Oversight and Complaints - Easier through Overseers of the Bar
We have been told that the Overseers of the Bar would provide an
effective means of Guardian ad litem oversight and management. We have
also been told that the means of filing a complaint through the
Overseers is something that the average person would be able to
understand and do on their own. While it is true that anyone can file a
complaint - and that a lawyer is not needed - as many are being told.
The problem is understanding the Rules and Rules for professional
Conduct.
Because the public are being told how easy it is to understand what they will have to deal with we are publishing both the Rules and Rules of Professional Conduct so that you can get a preview of what is to come for Guardians ad litem. Before diving in and reading here are some statistics:
The rules consist of 62 pages and 40205 words. The Rules of Professional Conduct comes in at a lite 138pages and 87700 words (the current flawed Rules and Standards for Guardians ad litem come in at a hefty 18 pages and 8008 words). Both of these documents are allegedly easier to understand and as Rep Jarrod Crockett would have us believe - make for an easier process for management, oversight and more importantly filing a complaint. It is nice to know that Rep Crockett is so concerned about making things easier for his constituents and citizens of Maine as to support a process that only a lawyer could love.
For more information please contact us at MeGALalert@gmail.com or keep up to date on Facebook.
We present to you a preview of what is to come courtesy of the Maine Overseers of the Bar:
pdf versions -
The Rules
The Rules for Professional Conduct
Because the public are being told how easy it is to understand what they will have to deal with we are publishing both the Rules and Rules of Professional Conduct so that you can get a preview of what is to come for Guardians ad litem. Before diving in and reading here are some statistics:
The rules consist of 62 pages and 40205 words. The Rules of Professional Conduct comes in at a lite 138pages and 87700 words (the current flawed Rules and Standards for Guardians ad litem come in at a hefty 18 pages and 8008 words). Both of these documents are allegedly easier to understand and as Rep Jarrod Crockett would have us believe - make for an easier process for management, oversight and more importantly filing a complaint. It is nice to know that Rep Crockett is so concerned about making things easier for his constituents and citizens of Maine as to support a process that only a lawyer could love.
For more information please contact us at MeGALalert@gmail.com or keep up to date on Facebook.
We present to you a preview of what is to come courtesy of the Maine Overseers of the Bar:
pdf versions -
The Rules
The Rules for Professional Conduct
Thursday, May 16, 2013
In Georgia Investigation shows no Oversight of Guardians ad litem
An investigation into Guardians ad litem shows many of the same issues that have been seen across the country. No oversight, accountability or management of these court officers that can have such a huge impact on a child's life. When you get a Guardian ad litem that does not fulfill their role there is very little that one can do to remove them from the case. You - as a parent - are working within a dysfunctional system.
While this article and video is focused on Georgia the points that are brought up by the reporter can be applied in every state. "The mental anguish for my children and me has been huge," said Gracie Ortiz Terrett a parent that was interviewed for the piece. Gracie says what many have felt by the uncaring process and hurt that children and parents experience and can relate to.
The video can be found at CBS Atlanta News. Please feel free to comment or write us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
In Utah a Grandmother fights for the best interest of her grandson
In Utah there is a young boy whose Grandmother is fighting for his life. This child was taken by the state on June 14th 2010 because the mother had made poor choices in her life. The grandmother of the boy tried to figure out how she could take custody of this boy - she could not afford an attorney. This Grandmother had been raising this boy from birth along with his brother - she had an emotional, physical and financial connection to these brothers.
In 2011 after having focused on the lives of her grandsons she was confronted with a court hearing in February. It was at this time the Judge first brought up the idea of adoption of one of the brothers. A therapist was ordered to research the matter of whether or not it would be in the best interest of the boy to be separated. The therapist Rachael Jones spoke with everyone that was involved with the boys life at the time. In April 2011 the foster parents who were attempting to adopt the child backed out. There was a new family that was interested in adoption. The grandmother now was only seeing her grandson twice a month for three hours of unsupervised visits. The therapist indicated that it would not be in the best interest of this boy to be adopted and should stay with the family at the court hearing.
The Judge stopped the therapist before she could finish and indicated that the child was going to be adopted. The grandmother in shock because of what she had just heard timidly raised her hand to ask the Judge if she could speak. The Judge barked to her saying "If you think you can change my mind - you are not...... but go ahead." The grandmother pleaded with the judge and the judge thanked the grandmother - the judge then turned her attention to the new foster parents who had only been with the child for less than three weeks and asked if they wanted to adopt. They said yes. In December 2011 there was a finalized adoption hearing.
The grandmother fought the system, the judge and the Guardian ad litem that became involved. Last November the grandmother was told by the courts that it was final - the boy stays with his new foster parents. On May 7, 2013 this grandmother is being given a second chance to bring her grandson back into his family and to be with his brother. Please follow this link for the appeal and follow the trials of this child and grandmother on Facebook.
STATE OF UTAH, in the interest of C.C. and K.H., to read about the appeal.
For up to date information on Guardian ad litem reform please write us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or like us on Facebook.
In 2011 after having focused on the lives of her grandsons she was confronted with a court hearing in February. It was at this time the Judge first brought up the idea of adoption of one of the brothers. A therapist was ordered to research the matter of whether or not it would be in the best interest of the boy to be separated. The therapist Rachael Jones spoke with everyone that was involved with the boys life at the time. In April 2011 the foster parents who were attempting to adopt the child backed out. There was a new family that was interested in adoption. The grandmother now was only seeing her grandson twice a month for three hours of unsupervised visits. The therapist indicated that it would not be in the best interest of this boy to be adopted and should stay with the family at the court hearing.
The Judge stopped the therapist before she could finish and indicated that the child was going to be adopted. The grandmother in shock because of what she had just heard timidly raised her hand to ask the Judge if she could speak. The Judge barked to her saying "If you think you can change my mind - you are not...... but go ahead." The grandmother pleaded with the judge and the judge thanked the grandmother - the judge then turned her attention to the new foster parents who had only been with the child for less than three weeks and asked if they wanted to adopt. They said yes. In December 2011 there was a finalized adoption hearing.
The grandmother fought the system, the judge and the Guardian ad litem that became involved. Last November the grandmother was told by the courts that it was final - the boy stays with his new foster parents. On May 7, 2013 this grandmother is being given a second chance to bring her grandson back into his family and to be with his brother. Please follow this link for the appeal and follow the trials of this child and grandmother on Facebook.
STATE OF UTAH, in the interest of C.C. and K.H., to read about the appeal.
For up to date information on Guardian ad litem reform please write us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or like us on Facebook.
Friday, May 10, 2013
Legislator’s illness delays guardian ad litem hearing on LD872
A legislative committee that was about to open discussions Thursday evening on a bill seeking to reform the state’s guardian ad litem program postponed the meeting after one of its members was taken away by ambulance.
The Judiciary Committee was in recess after hours of hearings on other bills, when Rep. Lisa Villa, D-Harrison, suddenly became ill.
Full story: PPH
Article is second one down
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Complaints fuel bid for guardian ad litem reform
A legislator says the system that protects the interests of kids mistreats other parties.
Portland Press HearldBefore David Dutremble got divorced in 2005 and fought for shared custody of his children, he had never heard of a guardian ad litem.
Now, in his first term as a state senator, Dutremble is leading an effort to reform what he considers a broken system, in which judges assign specially registered lawyers or mental health workers to step into the most contentious cases, like divorces, to represent the children.
Dutremble, a Democrat from Biddeford, has filed a bill to make sweeping changes to Maine's guardian ad litem program, including a better definition of the role, a new management structure, a database to track the work, and increased requirements to qualify as a guardian ad litem.
The Legislature's Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on an amended version of his proposal at 2 p.m. Thursday.
"It's a hot issue. I'm a freshman senator and everyone knows my name," Dutremble said. "I'm getting a lot of pushback from lawyers and the judiciary. There's people who live off the guardian system. It's all about the money."
On opposing sides of the bill are the guardians themselves, and the parents who feel they were wronged by guardians' actions in their cases.
Dutremble said the guardian ad litem assigned to his case immediately sided with his ex-wife and decided that Dutremble's job as a Biddeford firefighter was not beneficial to raising children.
Full story: PPH
Reform for guardians ad litem under way
This article came out on April 11, 2013.
Biddeford-Saco-OOB Courier
By Tracey Collins
Contributing Writer
BIDDEFORD – Eight years after his divorce, state Sen. David Dutremble (DDistrict 4) is lending his political support and personal experience to reform the laws that govern court-appointed guardians in family matters.
On March 28, Dutremble joined fellow lawmakers and citizens from York County to testify at a public hearing of the Maine State Judicial Committee in Augusta.
“Prior to my divorce I had never entered a courtroom as a defendant. I can assure you, the appointment of a guardian ad litem was one of the worst experiences of my life – and I am a full-time firefighter,” said Dutremble during his testimony.
The guardian appointed during his divorce suggested his work schedule as a veteran firefighter would not be healthy for his children and recommended he change jobs.
Since 1979, guardian ad litems have been appointed by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services under Title 22. In 1994, the statute was extended to include court appointed guardians in Title 19 family law matters. According to the judiciary, as the number of divorces and other stressful family matter cases have increased, so too have the needs for court-appointed parties to represent the best interest of children caught in the crossfire of contentious family matters, such as custody disputes. The problem, said Dutremble, is that the system is skewed to benefit the divorce industry, not the children caught in the middle.
Full story: Courier
Biddeford-Saco-OOB Courier
By Tracey Collins
Contributing Writer
BIDDEFORD – Eight years after his divorce, state Sen. David Dutremble (DDistrict 4) is lending his political support and personal experience to reform the laws that govern court-appointed guardians in family matters.
On March 28, Dutremble joined fellow lawmakers and citizens from York County to testify at a public hearing of the Maine State Judicial Committee in Augusta.
“Prior to my divorce I had never entered a courtroom as a defendant. I can assure you, the appointment of a guardian ad litem was one of the worst experiences of my life – and I am a full-time firefighter,” said Dutremble during his testimony.
The guardian appointed during his divorce suggested his work schedule as a veteran firefighter would not be healthy for his children and recommended he change jobs.
Since 1979, guardian ad litems have been appointed by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services under Title 22. In 1994, the statute was extended to include court appointed guardians in Title 19 family law matters. According to the judiciary, as the number of divorces and other stressful family matter cases have increased, so too have the needs for court-appointed parties to represent the best interest of children caught in the crossfire of contentious family matters, such as custody disputes. The problem, said Dutremble, is that the system is skewed to benefit the divorce industry, not the children caught in the middle.
Full story: Courier
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
LD872 - Our View on How Guardian ad litem Reform Should be Crafted
On Thursday May 9 at 2 pm at the State House in Augusta (room 428) there will be the final hearing on the bill LD872. What will it look like? We have caught glimpses of the direction the bill may take. Chairperson Sen. Linda Valentino we are told wants unanimous backing of this bill in order for it to move on. What will it look like? There are four points that we would like to see incorporated in LD872.
Guardian ad litem Job description: In the original LD872 (link to original concept - this is not the finished bill) it was presented that the role of Guardian ad litem is missing a clearly defined job description. This is one of the recommendations made by OPEGA in 2006. This Job description should be a statute - rules and standards are disposable as we have experienced many times. Judges have to comply with statutes.
- As a suggestion for a Guardian ad litem job description - A Guardian ad litem is a court appointed specialist in some contested divorces who has responsibilities to the court, the child and the parents. The Guardian ad litem is responsible to propose the best plan for the child(ren) custody arrangements in a disputed divorce. The starting point of a Guardians ad litem work is the presumption that every child needs both parents equally, unless, subsequently there are provable over-riding reasons to the contrary. To this end the Guardian ad litem collects relevant data for the court, interviews relevant people, forms a relationship with the child and proposes custody recommendations to the court, the child and the parties. In the event of a dispute about data or recommendations there should be an opportunity for open cross examination in court. Any additional activities undertaken by the Guardian ad litem with the parties which add to billable hours should be by contract for services mutually agreed to by the Guardian ad litem and the parties paying for the service and would not be covered by immunity
Guardian ad litem Complaint Protocol: The ability to file a complaint and having a clearly defined complaint protocol - Any complaint protocol should have a quality assurance and consumer protection goal. It should be readily accomplished 'pro se' by parties or others who have witnessed or experienced Guardian ad litem malpractice. It requires a comprehensive written instructions, standardized form to registering the complaint. An official should be available to aide those making a complaint and explain the steps in the complaint process. There should be instructions of what constitutes a legitimate complaint against a Guardian ad litem. Feedback and complaint status information are also needed. Apart from the investigation procedures there should be as much public transparency as possible and opportunities for full rebuttal at appropriate times in the procedure. When disciplinary or corrective action is taken this should be posted publicly for consumer protection. Dismissals of complaints should be explained to complainants in a way that is understandable.
It is inappropriate for a private - not for profit - organization funded by lawyers such as the Maine Overseers of the Bar to carry out public oversight function for Maine's court officials of any kind at any status level. It is inappropriate for the legislature to authorize Judicial function of oversight to private organizations the Overseers of the Bar. A private organization has no immediate accountability to Maine Government or to the people of the State of Maine. The Maine Guardian ad Litem Institute (MEGALI - a trade organization of the Guardian ad litem industry) or Chamber of Commerce as not for profit organizations are conceptually not too different as private organizations with a special interest focus as the Overseers of the Bar. While the Overseers of the Bar - as a guild - boasts perhaps a more distinguished membership than some of the aforementioned organizations - they are heavily identified as special interest and have no accountability to the public. The Guardian ad litem complaint process belongs under the direction of public government surveillance in the Judicial Branch or as a function of the Bureau of Financial Regulation.
Guardian ad litem Immunity - should only cover for those activities specifically covered by the core job description (see section 1). All non core activities, such as service contracts with parties for various expanded mission functions would not be immune from liability.
Parents as part of the Child's Best Interest. The best interest of the Child addresses the social, health and educational needs. In addition it needs an explicit statement that every child needs both parents as being in the child(ren) best interest. Every child(ren) should be presumed to need equal parenting time with both parents - unless there are specific proven reasons (hard evidence) why this should not happen. There should be an opportunity to debate this question fully in court. A Guardian ad litem opinion on "the best interest" is of no more value or validity than any other persons opinion. Facts should be what is needed to move from a 50/50 parenting split for a child. This shift in emphasis would aim at diminishing the destructive, competitive and adversarial atmosphere that is present in custody disputes - starting with equity of custody as a given. It would place the burden of evidentiary proof for less than equitable custody on the Guardian ad litem - and not the parties.
With LD872 we have a state to craft a role that works for the child, the parents and family as well as the courts. Or with LD872 our Representatives can pander to the powerful special interest that talk of equitable change for children and parents. Please contact our Representatives and help to educate them on the need for meaningful reform. Please contact us at MeGALalert@gmail.com for contact information on your Representative. Follow us on Facebook for up to date information on Guardian ad litem reform.
Guardian ad litem Job description: In the original LD872 (link to original concept - this is not the finished bill) it was presented that the role of Guardian ad litem is missing a clearly defined job description. This is one of the recommendations made by OPEGA in 2006. This Job description should be a statute - rules and standards are disposable as we have experienced many times. Judges have to comply with statutes.
- As a suggestion for a Guardian ad litem job description - A Guardian ad litem is a court appointed specialist in some contested divorces who has responsibilities to the court, the child and the parents. The Guardian ad litem is responsible to propose the best plan for the child(ren) custody arrangements in a disputed divorce. The starting point of a Guardians ad litem work is the presumption that every child needs both parents equally, unless, subsequently there are provable over-riding reasons to the contrary. To this end the Guardian ad litem collects relevant data for the court, interviews relevant people, forms a relationship with the child and proposes custody recommendations to the court, the child and the parties. In the event of a dispute about data or recommendations there should be an opportunity for open cross examination in court. Any additional activities undertaken by the Guardian ad litem with the parties which add to billable hours should be by contract for services mutually agreed to by the Guardian ad litem and the parties paying for the service and would not be covered by immunity
Guardian ad litem Complaint Protocol: The ability to file a complaint and having a clearly defined complaint protocol - Any complaint protocol should have a quality assurance and consumer protection goal. It should be readily accomplished 'pro se' by parties or others who have witnessed or experienced Guardian ad litem malpractice. It requires a comprehensive written instructions, standardized form to registering the complaint. An official should be available to aide those making a complaint and explain the steps in the complaint process. There should be instructions of what constitutes a legitimate complaint against a Guardian ad litem. Feedback and complaint status information are also needed. Apart from the investigation procedures there should be as much public transparency as possible and opportunities for full rebuttal at appropriate times in the procedure. When disciplinary or corrective action is taken this should be posted publicly for consumer protection. Dismissals of complaints should be explained to complainants in a way that is understandable.
It is inappropriate for a private - not for profit - organization funded by lawyers such as the Maine Overseers of the Bar to carry out public oversight function for Maine's court officials of any kind at any status level. It is inappropriate for the legislature to authorize Judicial function of oversight to private organizations the Overseers of the Bar. A private organization has no immediate accountability to Maine Government or to the people of the State of Maine. The Maine Guardian ad Litem Institute (MEGALI - a trade organization of the Guardian ad litem industry) or Chamber of Commerce as not for profit organizations are conceptually not too different as private organizations with a special interest focus as the Overseers of the Bar. While the Overseers of the Bar - as a guild - boasts perhaps a more distinguished membership than some of the aforementioned organizations - they are heavily identified as special interest and have no accountability to the public. The Guardian ad litem complaint process belongs under the direction of public government surveillance in the Judicial Branch or as a function of the Bureau of Financial Regulation.
Guardian ad litem Immunity - should only cover for those activities specifically covered by the core job description (see section 1). All non core activities, such as service contracts with parties for various expanded mission functions would not be immune from liability.
Parents as part of the Child's Best Interest. The best interest of the Child addresses the social, health and educational needs. In addition it needs an explicit statement that every child needs both parents as being in the child(ren) best interest. Every child(ren) should be presumed to need equal parenting time with both parents - unless there are specific proven reasons (hard evidence) why this should not happen. There should be an opportunity to debate this question fully in court. A Guardian ad litem opinion on "the best interest" is of no more value or validity than any other persons opinion. Facts should be what is needed to move from a 50/50 parenting split for a child. This shift in emphasis would aim at diminishing the destructive, competitive and adversarial atmosphere that is present in custody disputes - starting with equity of custody as a given. It would place the burden of evidentiary proof for less than equitable custody on the Guardian ad litem - and not the parties.
With LD872 we have a state to craft a role that works for the child, the parents and family as well as the courts. Or with LD872 our Representatives can pander to the powerful special interest that talk of equitable change for children and parents. Please contact our Representatives and help to educate them on the need for meaningful reform. Please contact us at MeGALalert@gmail.com for contact information on your Representative. Follow us on Facebook for up to date information on Guardian ad litem reform.
Ireland - New service to advocate for children in care
Irish Examiner|Noel Baker
Frances Fitzgerald, the children’s minister, will today launch a new advocacy service for children in care amid calls for an overhaul of the guardian ad litem service in the courts.
The national advocacy service operated by EPIC (Empowering People In Care) will provide a one- to-one service exclusively for children in, and leaving the care system, operating in Dublin North East, Dublin Mid-Leinster, and Cork in HSE South.
The hands-on service aims to ensure that the views of the young person are heard, in addition to linking them to appropriate services and attending various meetings such as care reviews.
Some aspects of the service have been operating for the past number of years but EPIC director Jennifer Gargan said that there was an obvious need for the service to be expanded. She said the number of referrals to the service from last October to the end of March was the same as the figure for the whole of 2011.
“We are effectively doubling the number of referrals,” she said.
“Our job is to make sure the young person’s views and concerns are heard.
“We are there to support them and offer advice but we do not impose our views on them at all.”
In legal settings the child’s voice is represented by the Guardian ad litem, independent representatives but paid for by the HSE. Ms Gargan said: “I think it would be better if it was not funded and operated by the HSE.”
She said a new unit within the new Child and Family Support Agency could oversee the registration of such guardians.
At the end of February there were 6,397 children in the care system, the majority of whom were in foster care placements.
However, a number of different reports and audits have consistently raised issues such as lack of allocated care workers or lack of aftercare provision.
The Child and Family Support Agency has pledged to improve the standard of service available and Ms Gargan said: “Twenty-nine reports and reviews over many years have highlighted that young people at risk or in care have consistently been invisible and unheard.
“This service will enable young people to access help and support, to have their views listened to and their concerns addressed.”
This morning’s event in Dublin will also see the launch of EPIC’s strategic plan for 2013-2015.
For additional information:
Irish Examiner story
EPIC Home Page
EPIC Advocacy Service Leaflet
Frances Fitzgerald, the children’s minister, will today launch a new advocacy service for children in care amid calls for an overhaul of the guardian ad litem service in the courts.
The national advocacy service operated by EPIC (Empowering People In Care) will provide a one- to-one service exclusively for children in, and leaving the care system, operating in Dublin North East, Dublin Mid-Leinster, and Cork in HSE South.
The hands-on service aims to ensure that the views of the young person are heard, in addition to linking them to appropriate services and attending various meetings such as care reviews.
Some aspects of the service have been operating for the past number of years but EPIC director Jennifer Gargan said that there was an obvious need for the service to be expanded. She said the number of referrals to the service from last October to the end of March was the same as the figure for the whole of 2011.
“We are effectively doubling the number of referrals,” she said.
“Our job is to make sure the young person’s views and concerns are heard.
“We are there to support them and offer advice but we do not impose our views on them at all.”
In legal settings the child’s voice is represented by the Guardian ad litem, independent representatives but paid for by the HSE. Ms Gargan said: “I think it would be better if it was not funded and operated by the HSE.”
She said a new unit within the new Child and Family Support Agency could oversee the registration of such guardians.
At the end of February there were 6,397 children in the care system, the majority of whom were in foster care placements.
However, a number of different reports and audits have consistently raised issues such as lack of allocated care workers or lack of aftercare provision.
The Child and Family Support Agency has pledged to improve the standard of service available and Ms Gargan said: “Twenty-nine reports and reviews over many years have highlighted that young people at risk or in care have consistently been invisible and unheard.
“This service will enable young people to access help and support, to have their views listened to and their concerns addressed.”
This morning’s event in Dublin will also see the launch of EPIC’s strategic plan for 2013-2015.
For additional information:
Irish Examiner story
EPIC Home Page
EPIC Advocacy Service Leaflet
Monday, May 6, 2013
Guardian ad litem recommends and Judge rejects settlement in alleged rape case
The Register-Herald
Claims against a teacher listed in the suit thrown out
— A federal judge has rejected a $65,000 settlement offer in a case involving the alleged rape of a young girl at the former Mount Hope High School, while at the same time throwing out negligence claims against one of the teachers originally listed in the suit.
U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin rejected the settlement April 22 under the advisement of the girl’s guardian ad litem, appointed to represent her interests in litigation.
Maryl Sattler, the guardian, wrote in an April 19 filing with the court that she had “serious reservations” about the proposed settlement.
She says the current settlement does not cover the costs of future psychological care or private schooling and does not adequately compensate her for her suffering. Only about $34,000 would remain of the $65,000 after attorney’s fees.
The civil suit was brought forward in 2011 by Stephen and Sharon Endicott of Pax, the girl’s biological grandparents and adoptive parents.
The alleged rape of a 13-year-old girl referred to by her initials, B.E., in court documents, occurred Nov. 12, 2010, at the high school. She asserts that after school, five members of the high school basketball team forced her into a stairwell and raped and physically and sexually assaulted her in the presence of another female student.
Full story: The Register Herald
Claims against a teacher listed in the suit thrown out
— A federal judge has rejected a $65,000 settlement offer in a case involving the alleged rape of a young girl at the former Mount Hope High School, while at the same time throwing out negligence claims against one of the teachers originally listed in the suit.
U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin rejected the settlement April 22 under the advisement of the girl’s guardian ad litem, appointed to represent her interests in litigation.
Maryl Sattler, the guardian, wrote in an April 19 filing with the court that she had “serious reservations” about the proposed settlement.
She says the current settlement does not cover the costs of future psychological care or private schooling and does not adequately compensate her for her suffering. Only about $34,000 would remain of the $65,000 after attorney’s fees.
The civil suit was brought forward in 2011 by Stephen and Sharon Endicott of Pax, the girl’s biological grandparents and adoptive parents.
The alleged rape of a 13-year-old girl referred to by her initials, B.E., in court documents, occurred Nov. 12, 2010, at the high school. She asserts that after school, five members of the high school basketball team forced her into a stairwell and raped and physically and sexually assaulted her in the presence of another female student.
Full story: The Register Herald
Friday, May 3, 2013
AU Professor Dr. Lori Handrahan Fired Without Due Diligence, Vindicated by New Evidence
This is an interesting article. International Development Professor Dr. Lori Handrahan has been in the news quite a lot. We have been famililar with her due to the custody battle that she has been going through in Maine. While the first part of the article deals with the dismissal from American University it does touch on the issues Dr. Handrahan has been dealing with in Maine. Look for the heading "Maine Family-Lawyer Stands on Side of Abuse".
Full Story: the EXTRA AU
Full Story: the EXTRA AU
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Judge Sets Fee for Lang Daughter’s Guardian Ad Litem
News Channel 3|Memphis
(Memphis, TN) News Channel 3 has learned how much the Guardian Ad Litem for the four daughters of fallen officer Martoiya Lang will be paid.
A judge ordered attorney Flordia Henderson receive $12,000 for guardianship duties of each child Monday, she will receive a total of $48,000 for all four girls.
Henderson will also be reimbursed more $2,164.21 she paid out of her own pocket for DNA analysis and counseling for the children.
Full story: New Channel 3
(Memphis, TN) News Channel 3 has learned how much the Guardian Ad Litem for the four daughters of fallen officer Martoiya Lang will be paid.
A judge ordered attorney Flordia Henderson receive $12,000 for guardianship duties of each child Monday, she will receive a total of $48,000 for all four girls.
Henderson will also be reimbursed more $2,164.21 she paid out of her own pocket for DNA analysis and counseling for the children.
Full story: New Channel 3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)