2. UNWARRANTED: While the Petitioner filed a
complaint where she (falsely) accused me of telephone
harassment, Judge Braslow sentenced me to attend a class for
batterers and to probation. At no time did the Petitioner
accuse me of battery or express fears of such a possibility and
Judge Braslow's decision made no mention of having found
me guilty of such a crime.
3. In my 51 years of life I have never committed a
crime or violated any laws. I don't drink, I don't do drugs, I
don't party. I have never been in a fight, not even in school. I
have never owned a weapon of any sort. I have received
accolades, expressions of gratitude and commendations from
hundreds, if not thousands of individuals and organizations,
including NYPD, the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, a UNESCO
prize nomination and a letter of support and endorsement from
His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.
I am an innocent man, a model citizen, a devoted father and
about as virtuous as anyone can be in this land.
4. INHUMANE: The batterers class and probation
require that I take at least 15 (fifteen) hours of my time
during business hours to go back and forth to White Plains for
these things. That would cause such a severe hardship that the
risk of loosing my modest livelihood altogether is real and
imminent. It is likely that I will end up out in the street.
5. Furthermore, having been forcibly and unjustly
separated from my daughter by Judge Braslow, with
devastating consequences to me and to my now multiply
disabled young daughter, the sentence falls at a time when I
am scheduled to spend two two-week periods of vacation with
her. This case has always been about denial of access and
about usurping a father's parental rights (see below). The
sentence simply further reduces my severely battered child's
time with the parent to whom she is rightfully most attached,
and it puts another nail in the coffin of fatherhood.
5a. Judge Bralow's new order takes the visitation
exchange out of the police station, where it took place on my
request per the divorce decree so as to avoid false accusations
on the part of the Petitioner, and into my car, away from
witnesses, making me vulnerable to false accusasions, and,
therefore false arrest.
6. THE LAW GUARDIAN: According to FedEx, my papers
were delivered to Ms. Cotler on June 10, 1999 11:54 AM.
The Court Clerk can verify this with the tracking no. by
calling 800-GO-FEDEX (see receipt). Ms. Cotler's document
is full of scurrilous lies, befitting the way rape victims are
demonized by unscrupulous lawyers in defending rapists.
6a. Judge Joan Cooney, in her order of recusal, hinted
at the removal of this derelict and malicious law guardian (see
attached order of recusal by Judge Cooney).
6b. Ms. Cotler was appointed law guardian on the
occasion of Judge Braslow convicting me of violating a
temporary order of protection, without a hearing, without
representation, without evidence and without admission of
guilt. She and Mr. Domicello, the court appointed attorney
for the Petitioner have served the purpose of lending
credibility to falshoods and judicial misconduct. Judge Bralow
reinstated the Oregon status at a hearing.
7. From the moment that she was appointed to
be the law guardian, Ms. Cotler initiated and maintained close
contact with Mr. Domicello, Susan's New York
court-appointed attorney, Christina Sanz, her Oregon attorney,
and a number of witnesses and unfriendly to me, such as Ms.
Barbara Kozol, who committed perjury, proof of which I
subsequently submitted to Mx. Cotler. Yet she avoided
contact with me, at a time when my daughter spent her days
with me. My phone calls went unanswered and she did not
have a fax which would have been very useful for
8. Ms. Cotler ignored Dr. David Oas' pleas
and his written statements warning about the dangers to my
daughter from handing her over to Susan. And in spite of the
urgency of the matter, she refused to accommodate my
request that she speak with him. She called him a hired gun,
even though I explained to her that he performed a
court-mandated evaluation in the process getting to know me
and Susan and Teddy, my daughter, personally. And while
she apparently felt it was necessary eventually, many months
later, to visit my daughter at Susan's, she decided to ignore
the fact that up to, until the catastrophic events following our
forced separation, Teddy spent every day with me, that I
raised her from birth and that clearly I was the more caring of
the two parents, always having chosen personal care for our
baby, as opposed to Susan's choice of handing her to
strangers. The fact that I am the better educated, more
knowledgeable in medicine and child development, more
insightful and more honest of the two parents was also not a
factor in her thinking.
9. Had Ms. Cotler ever bothered to see me with my
daughter, she would have seen that it takes a huge effort for
her to leave me. We are that attached. Had she bothered to
observe the visitation exchange, she would have noted that,
while she runs to me, she runs away from her mother and that
she hits, bites and scratches her mother, who has treated her
so horribly. Ms. Cotler has never expressed my child's
wishes, which are very emphatic, to be with me. But then
Ms. Cotler abandoned her own newborn to third parties so as
not to interrupt her career, so ignoring her own infant's
wishes. I chose to raise my child personally, making serious
personal sicrifices in the process, without realizing that the
militant feminists of America would find that sufficient reason
to persecute me and to destroy my innocent child.
10. Additionally, when I complained to the
Oregon judge that I was not notified when my daughter was
hospitalized and that having found out about her
hospitalization inadvertently from other sources, Susan
instructed the hospital staff to not allow me to visit, Susan
testified in court under oath, in Oregon, that she informed the
law guardian, Ms. Kotler, immediately and that she was asked
to let me know. She did not let me know and she did not
intervene to allow my sick child to see me, the person to
whom she is most attached to and the one she respects the
most. And while Mr. Domicello, Susan's court-appointed
attorney in New York, had the decency to intervene and sign
a letter regarding the New York Family Court decision after
Susan lied to the Oregon Court about it, she chose to do
11. In spite of numerous warnings to her about
the potential dangers to my daughter from our unjustified
forced separation, she exhibited a complete lack of a sense of
urgency and, upon my daughter's hospitalization, complete
apathy. As she knows, my daughter, who was previously
never admitted to a hospital, was hospitalized three times
following our separation. She also suffered brain damage and
severe disabilities, which were not present at the time that I
contacted her. I cannot imagine what the role of the law
guardian would entail if it involved ignoring dangers to a
12. Ms. Cotler had every opportunity to
intervene and to ask the Court to take action, so as to prevent
this calamity. Instead, she chose to postpone the hearing, in
which the Family Court reinstated the then in effect Oregon
order where my daughter spent her days with me, so as to
facilitate the sinister goals of the other side.
13. I believe Ms. Cotler's actions are shameful
and they portray not just incompetence and dereliction of
duty, but a failure as a human being. As far as I'm
concerned, she is as responsible for the terrible harm that was
inflicted on my daughter and to me as Susan is, and I view
her as someone who has Teddy's blood in her hands. She
was appointed seemingly for the purpose of lending credence
to falsehoods emanating from the other side. The Court
should not allow Ms. Kotler's utterly unqualified and biased
diagnosis of my daughter, Theodora Coutsoukis, but take a
look at some of the medical and educational records from the
providers to whom the petitioner, that is, the other side, took
my daughter (already submitted to this court in my brief App.
Div. No: 98-11277).
14. Ms. Kotler likes to act as a psychologist, a child
development expert, and a psychiatrist. She had every
opportunity to look at the records from the hospital where my
daughter was hospitalized. She has evidence of brain damage.
She has all the medical records and educational records which
show how my daughter was diminished. She ignored them.
She just doesn't like to admit it. Judge Braslow chose not to
ask for a psychological evaluation of me, because she was
made aware that a psychological evaluation of the parties in
Oregon revealed that I was perfectly sane and the better of the
two parents, while blasting the Petitioner-Respondent, Susan,
for usurping my parental rights and for malicious denial of
access (see below and Exhibit 1).
15. Early on during the proceedings in this matter,
Judge Braslow conveyed a threat to me through the Mr.
Domicello, with whom she collaborated ex parte behind my
back, that I would have to either consent to the Petitioner's
totally unjustified and malicious order of protection or be
sentenced to probation and this batterer's class, regardless of
the merits of the case. Capitulating to such threats, while
completely innocent, would constitute acceptance of norms
absent from even mildly democratic societies.
16. I was convicted by a scandal tainted judge who
made it clear that under no circumstances would I be allowed
to prove my innocence and who conducted a veritable
kangaroo court to railroad me.
17. Judge Braslow signed the order/sentence A MONTH
AFTER RECUSAL and in the midst of a drive for her
removal from the bench. This court must not allow me to
become the victim of a malicious vendetta by a judge on the
18. While Judge Tolbert, who signed the Petitioner's
temporary order of protection eliminated all the nonsense and
limited it to not harassing her by phone and not to call after
9:00 PM (things that I don't do), Judge Braslow urged the
Petitioner's court appointed attorney to bring in additional
charges, a modified petition.
19. After Judge Braslow's recusal, her supervising
judge, Joan Cooney, found it appropriate to not allow Judge
Tolbert, who is obviously not swayed by nonsense, to hear
matters in this case, but held a hearing herself, only to recuse
herself, without a coherent explanation.
20. After Judge Cooney recused herself, again she chose
not to allow Judge Tolbert to hear this case. And while
retaining jurisdiction in Westchester County, she assigned the
case to Judge Sweeny in Putnam County.
21. Once she assigned the case to Judge Sweeny, Judge
Cooney retained my file in her chambers for OVER A
MONTH, preventing action on my motions by orders to show
cause and denying me access to documents that I needed for
the brief which I recently filed with the Appellate Division of
the Supreme Court.
22. And while passing on to Judge Sweeny, very
belatedly, some of my pleadings, others were retained and not
acted upon. They include my motion by order to show cause
requesting that my case be transferred to Putnam County.
23. DENIAL OF ACCESS: The Petitioner's prior
persecution in Oregon resulted in a Court ordered
psychological evaluation. The court mandated psychological
evaluator blasted the Petitioner for usurping my parental rights
and for denying me and my daughter access to each other (see
attached Exhibit 1).
24. Upon arrival in New York, the Petitioner found an
advocate in an inhumane and corrupt judge, who proceeded to
brutalize me and my daughter.
Theodora Coutsoukis, who was born with flawless
genes, in excellent health, superior neonatal scores, athletic
and brilliant, is now crippled for life, with multiple
disabilities, as a consequence of the actions of the Petitioner,
her unscrupulous cohorts and Judge Braslow's malicious
actions. A summary of facts from the time of our
arrival in New York, excerpted from my brief is appended as
Sworn before me this _______ day
of June, 1999
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR NEW
My commission expires:
1111 Howard Street
Peekskill, NY 10566
(914)739-8888 or (800)483-4856
email: Photius@theodora.com - URL: www.photius.com