angiEmedia

In June 2011, Judge Diane E. Gibbons of Bucks County, Pennsylvania, illegally ordered an excellent web site called The Psycho Ex Wife to be taken down in violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment. The site is reportedly owned by a Pennsylvania woman named Misty Weaver-Ostinato whose partner for the last several years has been a man named Anthony Morelli. On the site, they identified themselves as DW and “Mister M” never using their real names or identifying information, nor the real name or identifying information of Morelli’s ex who allegedly inspired the site with her behaviors.

First Amendment rights expert Eugene Volokh writes that he believes this order is blatantly unconstitutional, especially because of its expansiveness:

from “Father Shall Take Down That Web Site and Shall Never on Any Public Media Make Any Reference to Mother At All,”

If the father says anything about the mother in public, he could be sent to jail for contempt of court. The order isn’t limited to banning libelous statements (though I think even such a much narrower ban would itself pose constitutional problems, especially under Pennsylvania law), nor is it even limited to statements about minor children (though even that sort of order strikes me as constitutionally impermissible). Rather, the court order categorically orders the removal of a Web site, and prohibits all public statements — factually accurate or not — by one person about another person.

Allison Morelli apparently claims that PEW (the abbreviation for “Psycho Ex Wife”, one of the main characters discussed on the site) is her, even though nobody is ever identified or named on the site. According to reports in other publications, PEW served as the source for around a quarter of the articles describing bizarre and abusive behaviors on the banned website.

Allison, for reasons that don’t make any sense to me at all, wants us all to believe that PEW is her and therefore the whole site is an attack on her. She claims the site is about her without naming or identifying her or anybody else. She simultaneously implies or maintains that she didn’t behave as the PEW character behaved but somehow she knows they were writing the site about her to attack her. This makes no sense to me, nor does it to much of anybody else except apparently Allison Morelli, her supporters, and Judge Gibbons.

The PEW character may not be meant to be literally interpreted. The words and actions appear to be what you could see as a synthesis of behaviors and conduct of more than one troubled ex-spouse. Certainly describing a person as looking like “Jabba the Hut” (a description used for PEW) is obviously figurative speech that no rational person is going to believe is a literal statement. Yet Allison Morelli claims the site is about her and is an attack on her, all the while trying to imply or claim she didn’t write the emails or do the actions described. But somehow she “knows” it is all about her.

However much literary license may have been taken with PEW’s words and actions and no matter what victimhood badge Allison is trying to win with her weird assertions, it is clear that “PEW” as used on the site often does not even refer to Allison Morelli even if you believe it sometimes does.

PEW is used to refer not just to the PEW character but also as a generic abbreviation throughout the site’s content. It means different things in different places. This abbreviation is often used to refer to any generic “psycho ex wife” or at times even more broadly any “psycho ex” regardless of gender or marital status.

Even the readers of the site used such terms to describe their own conflicts. “PEW” is frequently used to generically refer to a “psycho ex wife” or to some other unnamed specific ex-wife that could not be Allison Morelli, unless of course she wants to claim she has been married to dozens or hundreds of the readers and they are all writing about her, too.

The site and its readers also use “PEH” to refer to “psycho ex husband” which can’t be about her. Or can it? If she were to claim she was a man named Alfred in some past life and therefore any references to “PEH” are about her, too, from her actions to date it looks like Judge Gibbons would be convinced by that argument.

The generic “psycho ex” content and discussion included all the kinds of things you’d expect to see discussed about malicious Borderlines, Narcissists, Antisocials, and other personality disorders that are typically seen in sociopaths. These include drug abuse, alcohol abuse, verbal abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, manipulation, projection, gaslighting, pathological lying, distortion campaigns, and more. They even discussed at times how these people get to be their malicious selves, often from a history of abuse as children. All of that is very generic and helpful information that doesn’t specifically pertain to Allison Morelli. Some of it may not have been written to have anything to do with her. Yet Judge Gibbons, in her infinite stupidity, sought to silence all of that content, too, because she apparently is unable or unwilling to differentiate between content that is widely and generally applicable and not specific to any one person and content (be it information or misinformation) that has to do with the Morelli dispute in particular.

Unfortunately for the operators of the site and its readers, Judge Gibbons does not seem able to ask basic questions about how an anonymous site naming and identifying nobody but quoting bizarre and abusive emails and describing similar behaviors could be about a person unless that person is also in effect admitting she is behind those words and actions.

Gibbons must also have failed her Constitutional Law classes on the First Amendment, nor does she understand that even if there was some defamatory or harassing statement on the site that this does not justify banning all the content. She evidently can’t comprehend or doesn’t care that roughly 2/3 or more of the material on the site wasn’t even about the PEW character and therefore could not have been about the Morelli dispute, even if Allison wants people to believe she is the PEW character.

Did Gibbons even review the site? By the appearance of the alleged transcripts I’ve seen so far, it looks like she just took Allison’s word for it when she moved to ban the site.

Take Down the Site Or Go To Prison

The judge stated among other things that if the site was not taken down, she would imprison Anthony and take away his kids. Here’s a direct quote from the alleged June 6, 2011 transcript:

THE COURT:
Father shall take down that website and shall never on any public media make any reference to the mother at all, nor any reference to the the relationship between mother and children, nor shall he make any reference to his children other than “happy birthday” or other significant school events. The father’s girlfriend shall not be referred to as mother and father shall not in any way interfere with mother’s relationship with her children.

Mother will not consume any alcohol at all and will continue in alcohol treatment.

This matter is continued for a period of four months.

By her words in the alleged transcript, Judge Gibbons indicates that Allison Morelli is an alcoholic. Later you see:

NAME REDACTED: You know, in the course of having custody evaluation, it was discovered that I had developed a drinking problem as a result of gastric bypass surgery that I had in March of ’09. And that after that point, you know, I suffered from addiction transference and, you know, it — I am certainly not going to minimize that today, that of course it impacted the children. But the children saw me intoxicated four times in the course of two years. And I am in treatment. I attend AA meetings.

To date I have not seen anybody disputing the legitimacy of this transcript. There’s also a second alleged transcript of a June 14, 2011 hearing available. I’d like to have some reasonably easy way to quickly authenticate such documents with court records, but apparently the Pennsylvania courts don’t publish such court records online.

The website had a lot to say about the “PEW” character over the years. “PEW” was alleged to be an emotional child abuser, harasser, abusive litigator, perjurer, frequent violator of court orders, and was suspected by Anthony and Misty of suffering from Borderline Personality Disorder.

If Allison Morelli didn’t do such things, then why on earth would she be arguing that the site is about her? And if she did so such things, why on earth would she want the public to hear about it by publicly claiming the site is about her?

If Anthony and Misty believe that PEW behaved so abusively, regardless of who PEW is, those familiar with such destructive situations should be able to understand why they would have been motivated to write anonymously about such conflicts.

Later in the transcript, Gibbons talks about incarcerating the father if he does not follow her orders, apparently including the ones regarding the illegal restrictions on his free speech rights and the illegal orders made regarding his partner’s website:
Read more…

Ben Vonderheide of Daddy Justice is well on the way to assembling a documentary film of his experiences dealing with the abusive courts and government in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. We summarized his story in our article Ben Vonderheide Exposes Pennsylvania’s Abusive Child Profiteering Racket last week. While Vonderheide particularly identifies with these abuses being done against fathers, he’s clearly aware of the state attacking and destroying mothers, too, as evidenced by various videos he’s produced and put on his website.

Below is what he has been calling a “trailer” for his movie. At over 21 minutes, it’s much longer than the typical trailer. It features Vonderheide, his son Quinta, and many of the dirty players in the Lancaster County courts and government, and his ex Wendy Flanders and her new boyfriend, Ted Yoder, both of whom were convicted for filing false police reports to get Vonderheide falsely arrested. Video that Ben recorded was important evidence for obtaining the convictions. Flanders then was given probation, rather than jail time, and sole custody of their son. The message is that false accusations pay in Lancaster.
Read more…

Rob’s recent comment pointing out the Ben Vonderheide case in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania made me curious. After all, it’s not often that you see the government actually prosecute somebody for making malicious false reports to the police to terrorize a father and block access to a child. On the surface, it looks like the government got it right in this case. Dig deeper, however, and you find that Ben Vonderheide is a poster case for government-backed terrorism against a parent who has been repeatedly abused by the government. The government is now using his son, Quinta Xavier Vonderheide, as a pawn in its vindictive battle to hide its crimes against the state’s children and families and attack those who attempt to expose them.

Alienating Ex Convicted of Lying to Police Gets Sole Custody

Quinta’s mother is Vonderheide’s ex-girlfriend Wendy Flanders. She has systematically alienated her son from his father and engaged in access blocking, denigration, defamation, and false police reports to destroy the child’s relationship with his father. She is unable to accept that their son should have time with both his parents and is willing to break the law, scheme, manipulate, and conspire to ensure that he will never see his father again. As is typical, family law courts reward such behaviors unless a parent can afford to bring contempt of court charges against the abuser.

She even attempted to change his name to Quinta Xavier Flanders, a common stunt for alienating parents who alter their children’s names to remove all mention of the hated ex.

This is nothing new for Flanders as she is a serial parental alienator. She has engaged in this child abuse not only involving Quinta, but also regarding her daughter Bryna Elizabeth Flanders-Harris and that girl’s father John Harris. In that case, she used false allegations of child sexual abuse among other methods. There are also reports that she attempted similar family terrorism against another previous ex, a Mr. Caruso who is no longer alive to defend himself and his child Emily from the sociopathic Flanders.
Read more…

Highlights of a speech by San Diego’s Honorable Lisa Drunk on June 31st

I am honored to appear before you tonight at this meeting of the San Diego County Bar Association. Thank you for inviting me to speak on my views on the best interests of children as judges see them. This is a very important matter as it is essential to our careers as jurists, attorneys, and court service providers.

As an experienced family law judge, I am tasked with upholding the law in my courtroom and serving the best interests of children. This is a difficult job, one to which I must give a great deal of consideration and attention to creating the best possible outcome to the people who really matter, judges and our friends.

When litigants enter my courtroom, they must understand that I am God and the law is what I say it is. If they question this, I will take their children, property, and other privileges away from them. They have no rights, only privileges which I allow them to have. They have no right to trial by jury, no right to due process of law, and no right to anything except to bask in the glow of my presence so long as they do not annoy me.
Read more…

Bonnie Sweeten and Julia Rakoczy

Bonnie Sweeten is the Bucks County, Pennsylvania, mother who works as a paralegal for Attorney Debbie Carlitz. She’s the mom who faked her 9 year old daughter Julia Rakoczy’s abduction and took her to Disneyworld as I discussed in my May 2009 article Pennsylvania Mom Abducts Child, Goes to Disney World. Now she’s back in the news for other reasons.

Sweeten stands accused of hiding a legal disciplinary suspension order against her boss, Carlitz, resulting in or enabling Carlitz to continue to practice law on a suspended license and to claim she knew nothing of the suspension. Sweeten allegedly signed service and disciplinary forms for Carlitz and falsely notarized them.
Read more…

Daniel Dougherty of Philadelphia has suffered many bad events in his life. He’s a former auto mechanic with alcohol addiction problems. He has had two broken marriages. But two of the tragedies stand out from the rest. In 1985, his girlfriend’s house burned down, killing his two sons who were asleep upstairs. In 1999, his second ex-wife was involved in a nasty child custody dispute with him. She reported to police that Dougherty set the 1985 fire which killed his children. She reportedly later retracted her claims, but it wasn’t enough to save Dougherty from a miserable fate.

The wheels of law enforcement whirred, people “changed” (falsified) their testimony to match the new story, and 14 years after that tragic fire, Dougherty was arrested. In his trial in 2000, he was sentenced to death for what appears could be a false allegation made by a nasty woman who couldn’t accept sharing child custody and was perhaps willing to see her ex-husband dead rather than accept joint custody.
Read more…

Not even a 7 year old child is safe from law enforcement persecution. At least that’s the case when you have Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, involved and Judge Mark Ciavarella was on the case. You may remember him from the $2.6 million (revised estimates are now pegging it at $2.8 million!) “kids for cash” rule of cruel and illegal injustice by him and his buddy in crime Michael Conahan.

Here’s another story from about four years before the discovery of the thousands of cases of judicial corruption that justify the death penalty for Ciavarella. In this one, cops bribed a 7 year old boy with candy and pizza to get a confession for a fire he couldn’t have possibly set. Further, the victim of the fire, elderly Mr. Benjamin Morris, was known to burn yard waste and debris in his backyard and may have started the fire himself.

Luzerne County “law enforcement” didn’t bother to question anybody who was taking care of the boy that fateful day. Why bother when you are criminal thugs with badges who already have somebody you can easily blame for a crime and can be cheaply made to self-incriminate?

Can’t Punish Dead Man, So Punish Little Boy

Dead Benjamin Morris of course couldn’t be punished for the fire, so the government targeted a 7 year old boy instead. They wanted another arrest and conviction on their score cards, and since building the case for the prosecution could be paid for largely via twenty bucks of candy and pizza, it was a a cheap and easy “win-win-win” for the police, prosecutor, and corrupt judge. Ciavarella ripped him away from his family and sent him away for “treatment” for a “crime” that not only was probably not committed by him but was quite possibly an accident caused by the dead victim. That these wrongful actions by the government harmed a little boy and his family does not matter to the corrupt officials of Luzerne County.
Read more…

Our nation’s children are no longer safe in their homes, schools, or anywhere they go. Far too often, the threat is not from traditional miscreants such as school bullies, class-cutters, and neighborhood drug-dealers but rather from the adults entrusted with the care of our children. Intolerant and extremist teachers, school administrators, police officers, district attorneys, and judges are a serious and growing threat to our children. They believe that children who make a minor mistake or dare to express an opinion or personal preference that is not in compliance with government thought control and anti-free-speech policies should be treated like felons. Even having to attend to basic bodily functions like using the bathroom and eating in schools controlled by these extremists can be a threat to the safety of our children.

Our friendly faced jackbooted government goons have made up euphemisms for their agendas. Given their limited intelligence, their choice phrases must be succinct.

“Zero tolerance” is one catch-phrase invented by “safety minded” school employees. No tolerance for dissent, suppression of individuality, banning freedom of speech, enforcement of dogmatic thinking, and criminalization of opinions that are counter to the teachers unions is what it objectively means. Coming from a more sensible age in which I could chose the color of my clothes and a pocket knife was not a weapon of mass destruction but rather a basic tool that many kids carried to school, it seems to me that kids today should be raising civil disobedience groups and learning guerrilla warfare tactics after they have been exposed to this extremism. But oddly it seems to be gradually zapping many of them into mind-numbed drones. Or maybe they are too busy playing Grand Theft Auto and Halo to know that sometimes criminals and conflicts are real.

“Kids for Cash” is another catch-phrase invented by somebody in the government, quite possibly by thousands of them at about the same time. They realized that when they see smiling little kids, they think of $$$ MONEY $$$ in their pockets, so it was a natural expression of their intent to use other people’s children for their own economic security. Although it’s not clear which government agency invented it first, many of them, from the courts to “CPS” to schools, are living by it. Seldom is anything done to distract the government from viewing our children as money sources and pawns for profit except in the most bizarre and extreme cases that even the goons are embarrassed by it. I suspect when something is done to temporarily divert the greedy goons from monetizing our children, it is only because these extreme examples are getting so far out there that it’s amazing that parents and grandparents who love their young ones are not storming courthouses with automatic weapons to protect their offspring from true evil. You’ll see some of these cases below.

Teacher Will Kick In Your Face If You Use the Potty!

If you’re a kindergartener in Miami, Florida, and go the the bathroom without permission, you might get your face kicked in by your teacher.

(from From Sex to Assault: What’s Up With America’s Teachers? Teachers Busted for Kicking Students, Showing Up Drunk, Having Affairs With Pupils)

For a 5-year-old Miami student who came home from school with a cut lip from being kicked in the face, the bully wasn’t a playground menace — it was, she alleges, her teacher.

The preschooler’s offense? Using the restroom without permission during naptime.

Miami police arrested Head Start teacher Jean Dorvil, 56, on child abuse charges. Miami-Dade Schools Police Sgt. Ivan Silva told ABCNews.com that detectives found during the course of their investigation that Dorvil had allegedly kicked two other students during the school year.

Daniel Weaver is a father who spent five years of his life fighting CPS and family law courts against false abuse allegations. He was finally exonerated. But the damage to his children and him have made him worried for all children and parents.

It is far more common than the public realizes for CPS and police to swoop in and terrorize a family with no evidence or due process. In the process, CPS and the police become child abusers who create extensive psychological damage in children that may take years of therapy to correct, therapy that the government will not pay to provide.
Read more…

Bucks County, Pennsylvania mother Bonnie Sweeten, age 38, called 911 repeatedly on May 26, 2009, to report that she and her 9-year-old from a previous marriage, Julia Rakoczy, had been abducted after their SUV was rear-ended and carjacked and the assailants grabbed and pushed them into the trunk of a dark Cadillac. She described the attackers as two black men.

Read more…