Today is Sunday, June 16, 2019: Father’s Day. A day where Americans celebrate and honor fathers and celebrate fatherhood, paternal bonds and the influence of fathers in society. Well, Almost.
Articles tagged as
Family Courts
KRISTIN RUGGIERO GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT
“Liars are always ready to take oaths.” —Vittorio Alfieri
On Wednesday, September 21, The New Hampshire Supreme Court heard from Kristin Ruggiero. Kristin seeks to overturn her convictions arguing that the court should have excluded a photo of her cell phone number, and an intercepted telephone conversation that served as the evidence that brought her to her current demise.
Kristin Ruggiero was sent to Jail in May of 2010, convicted of twelve counts consisting of lying and falsifying physical evidence. Kristin had tried to do what many before her have done and gotten away with: Using the court system to exact a personal vendetta against her ex-husband Jeffrey Ruggiero.
In oral arguments before the Court, Attorney Mark L. Sisti argued that the evidence used to convict Kristin should have been thrown out because it was disqualified under N.H. RSA 570-A:6 because in New Hampshire, her consent was not obtained by the parties in South Carolina to make the intercept. New Hampshire commonly referred to as a, “two party” state, requires consent of all parties before any recording may be made, while South Carolina does not. Sisti concedes that, while no crime may have been committed by the recording because the interception took place in South Carolina, A New Hampshire resident still has the expectation of privacy under the statute, and the evidence should have been excluded. Sisti essentially argues for an absolute long-arm immunity without consideration to laws of extra-territorial consequence. (Listen to the arguments HERE).
KRISTIN RUGGIERO ATTORNEY ACCUSED OF ALTERING DOCUMENT
“A witch and a bitch always dress up for each other, because otherwise the witch would upstage the bitch, or the bitch would upstage the witch, and the result would be havoc” ~Tennessee Wiliams, American Playwright
The Union Leader’s James A. Kimble reports this morning that convicted liar Kristin Ruggiero’s divorce attorney, Linda Theroux, is being brought before the State Attorney Discipline Office charging that Theroux changed a military release form violating state ethics rules. Theroux, who represented Kristin Ruggiero in the divorce case, stands accused of misconduct during the course of her representation.
Theroux allegedly altered a military records release form Jeffrey Ruggiero signed and handed over to her, wrote James Kruse, an attorney for the Attorney Discipline Office.
Attorney James Kruse for the Discipline Office charges that Theroux altered a Military Records release given her by Jeffrey Ruggiero. After receiving the release Theroux’s alteration expanded the scope of inquiry in adding that Ruggiero assented to disclosing his “entire military file” notwithstanding documents classified as ‘Secret’ or ‘Top Secret’ or for National Defense Purposes,” Theroux never subsequently submitted the records release for judicial review by the family court, Kruse’s complaint further charges.
Kristin Ruggiero is a story that won’t go away for a long time to come. It is the quintessential epic saga of of lying, manipulation, skullduggery…a plot found only on scripts of daytime soaps, but with all the trappings of a Shakespearian tragedy, sans dark humor.
Union Leader’s Kimble reports that, “Jeffrey Ruggiero’s divorce lawyers at the time, Phil DesFossess and Celeste Christo, found out about the altered document when they were contacted by a U.S. Coast Guard commander.”
Angry Shrew? Or Unjustly Treated Mother?
“Ah, yes, divorce … From the Latin word meaning to rip out a man’s genitals through his wallet.” -Robin Williams
An acrimonious divorce where children are involved nearly always devolves into a test of wills between the litigants, who were once husband and wife. Statistically, the woman in such cases prevail a majority of time. And of those times where the court battle is disposed of in family court, the acrimony has often risen to a level where it simply isn’t sufficient for one party to prevail over the other. There must be some form of scorched earth brought to bear.
In many cases, a prevailing parent, will seek child support orders and awards that financially disadvantage the losing spouse. Allegations will often follow questioning the suitability or fitness of a parent. Invariably, it isn’t enough to simply prevail on the point of law. One must simply crush the other, financially and emotionally, alienating the children by building a wall between the non-custodial parent and the minor children. An extreme environment of discomfort and stress is built around visitation exercises, many simply give up, emotionally exhausted over their children’s animosity toward them. The custodial spouse later charges inattentiveness for lack of consistency in the visitation schedule. This is probably one of the most ugliest facets of life anybody could be forced to endure. The family courts, charged with mediating these issues, often makes them far worse.
Today, the Union Leader‘s Nancy West treats us to the sordid tale of Cheryl Ann Maher, a mother seeking to regain custody of her minor children. The father, Dr. Eric Lee Knight presently has physical custody. Following a visit with the minor children, Ms. Maher was to return the children no later than 5:00 PM on March 13, in keeping with the parenting plan. She did not. She spirited them off, instead to a hotel in Salem, telling the UL her, “Ex-husband withheld medicine from one of the twin daughters for cold-like symptoms and fails to provide adequate services for the twins’ autism.”
Did Kristin Ruggiero Unwittingly Establish A New, “Second Look” Doctrine?
Typical. A woman gets pissed at her boyfriend. In retribution, she runs down to the local police department and asserts she has been threatened and as proof, offers her cell phone containing a threatening text from the alleged, “scary boyfriend.” The boyfriend is subsequently arrested and jailed under domestic violence laws -End of story…or is it?
In this case, Police obviously took a second look. Local Rochester woman Samantha Morrison, exacted an age-old retribution for her unspecified scorn when she filed a complaint with Rochester Police alleging that her boyfriend threatened her on February 17th. The boyfriend was subsequently arrested, jailed and served with a Domestic Violence protective order out of Dover District Court on February 18th.
But, something sparked a follow-up investigation. After taking a closer second look, Police charged Ms. “Shrew” Morrison with false report to police and falsifying physical evidence. Determined subsequently that Ms. “Shrew-Morrison” used a spoofing software program installed on her cell phone to fabricate a fake threatening text message, resulting in her boyfriend’s arrest, the faux charges have been dropped.
This case comes in the wake of Kristin Ruggiero’s most recent indictments on Witness Tampering, Falsifying Physical Evidence, Solicitation of Perjury, Perjury, and Unsworn Falsification, after being imprisoned for attempting to have her ex-husband falsely locked up.
Keeping Family Court Simple, Ain’t So Simple
A Union Leader editorial today, entitled, “Keep it simple: Family court rules work,” asserts that HB 259, “AN ACT requiring the supreme court to adopt rules of evidence for the judicial branch family division“, is a bad idea. The Editorial suggests that implementation of evidentiary rules would overburden a system where the majority of the litigants are not represented by attorneys, give an inequitable disadvantage to a party who is represented by counsel over one who is not, and would drum up business for lawyers, making the system unwieldy and inefficient. I couldn’t disagree more with my friends at the Union Leader.
The editorial informs us that About 70 percent of people who use the family courts do so without lawyers, mostly because they can’t afford them. While we might agree that it is desirable to have a court system that is accessible to laymen, not being able to afford a lawyer should not absolve people from the responsibility to be reasonable in what they present to the family court in furtherance of their legal positions. The UL asserts, “Alleged facts can be rebutted by the other side,” and while that is fundamentally true, the UL overlooks the notion that unsubstantiated allegations from a bitter and angry spouse inevitably triggers costly ancillary resources and services.
The UL writes, “The loose rules allow people to, say, introduce a phone bill as evidence instead of have a phone company employee testify, or have a witness present to back up an allegation if it’s challenged instead of having to put all witnesses on the stand.” That notion exists already and is more commonly referred to as a “prima facie” offering; that is, the evidence is presumed true on its face unless otherwise rebutted.
The UL tells us, (the present system allows) cases to proceed swiftly, but most importantly it allows people to get divorced or settle custody disputes without hiring lawyers they otherwise cannot afford. Few would disagree hiring legal counsel to navigate through the twists and turns of a divorce case can be costly. There are a significant number of people who simply do not possess the financial means to retain legal services. But what the UL also fails to point out from a fiscal standpoint, is that in a significant number of cases where children are concerned, a guardian ad litem is frequently appointed and the court invariably generates an order requiring one or both parties to pay for the services of a court-appointed GAL…who is most often, A lawyer. And, whether or not they can afford it is inconsequential when they get that first bill from the office of cost containment.
Streamlined Judicial economy is hardly a credible reason for fast food-style divorces that forego evidentiary standards in favor of expediency. The New Hampshire Supreme Court is chucked full of slip opinions deciding, “what is evidence” and “what is not evidence,” all argued by lawyers, I might add, where the personal philosophies of judges and masters prevailed, triggering those appeals.