History
of the relationship:
The separation took place on 11/14/86. There was an oral
agreement which provided for regular support payments to Marcia and
regular visitation for the father. After he left, Marcia
claimed the father had emotionally damaged their daughter, Audrey, and
that it was unsafe for her to see him. A lengthy legal battle
followed. Marcia persisted in denying all contact between
father and daughter, and between the daughter and the father's
parents. This situation continued until 6/87, when the
Supreme Court judge ruled that the father could again see Audrey in the
context of a psychological examination, which would include all
parties. The wife's attorney successfully fought this order
and in July a second Order was issued. Again Marcia's
attorney objected and in October of 1987 the entire custody matter was
turned over, by
the Supreme Court judge, to the Family Court. Again
evaluations were ordered, and again the wife's attorney objected to the
terms of the Order. He was unsuccessful this time and
on November 7, 1987, in a supervised setting, the father saw
his daughter for the first time in a year.
As part of the psychological evaluation the father was
allowed to see Audrey for one hour each week, in the presence of a
social worker, psychologist, and / or psychiatrist. After two
months the visits were increased to 5 hours each week at the Family
Court Clinic, without a supervisor continuously present. In
January of 1988 Family Court Services, the agency doing the evaluation
completed their reports. The
social worker,
psychologist,
and psychiatrist were unanimous in describing Marcia as emotionally
unstable, and and in recommending custody to the father.
On January 5th the trial for custody of Audrey began. On that
day judge Carmen Cognetta called a recess and proposed an interim visitation schedule
which the father accepted.
In March the father changed attorneys. The new attorney,
Barry Bonderowsky, negotiated an interim visitation schedule with the
wife's lawyer (E. Judson Cender) which granted the father substantially
more visitation. Specifically, it provided that the father
would see his daughter every Saturday, and every other weekend would be
an overnight. In addition the father was allowed to see her for three
hours every
Wednesday afternoon. Both parties kept to this schedule
through April and reported regularly to Family Court Services any
problems they had. The interim agreement was to run until
6/2/88. On that date the
custody trial was to resume, if either party felt the
necessity.
On 4/30/88 Marcia, failed to make Audrey available for her scheduled
visit. On 5/2 her attorney informed Family Court that they
had
evidence
that the father had sexually abused Audrey. The
father's lawyer filed an immediate Order to Show Cause, and all parties
were back in Court on 5/23. The Family Court judge ordered a
second round of evaluations and appointed a law guardian, Gayle S.
Lerner, and social worker Susan J. Greenberg, on Audrey's
behalf.
On that day, as the Court proceedings ended, Audrey - who
standing between the mother and the mother's parents, suddenly
broke free and ran to the father and hugged him.
The father completed his interviews with the legal guardian, social worker and Special Services
for Children. Marcia did not see the guardian or social
worker. She did go to SSC, but refused to bring Audrey.
The evaluations were to be completed
on 5/27. On that date the father returned to Court.
Audrey's law guardian and social worker both recommended custody to the
father. Marcia did not appear. Her lawyer professed
not to know where she was. No one will admit to having seen
her since.
Summary of findings
regarding Marcia
In the course of the psychological evaluation it came to light that:
1.
Marcia' sworn
statement that Audrey had been emotionally damaged by the father was explicitly
denied by the psychologist she named as the individual who made that
assessment (Dr. Murray).
2.
Dr. Murray denied
that he had ever treated Audrey for any condition, despite Maria's
sworn statement that Audrey had been continuously in treatment with
him. He further denied that he was a child psychologist,
despite her sworn statement that he was.
3. Audrey's pediatrician, Dr. Stakofsky, examined my
daughter, at my wife's request, for evidence that she had been
abused.
He found no
evidence of abuse despite Marcia's claim that he had.
4. On 10/23/88 SSC found no evidence of sexual abuse and
dropped all charges.
More on Marcia:
Marcia was a school teacher, special education, at P.S. 102, Brooklyn,
N.Y. She went on maternity leave when our daughter was
born. Though she claimed to have no means of support, records
recovered from the marital home document she was employed by:
PEDIATRIC OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY
ASSOCIATES, PC
830 Howard Ave.
Staten Island, N.Y.
Unit 4C
(718) 761-8605 (718)
448-6414
She functioned as an evaluator of young children. Note her
Masters degree in special education was awarded by Wagner College,
Staten Is., N.Y.
At the time of her flight, Marcia was in debt to her lawyer, her
psychiatrist, and to several other individuals and
organizations. A partial list follows.
1. E. Judson Cender (lawyer)
................................... $4,775.15
2. William H, Kaplan (psychiatrist)
.............................. $2,430.00
2a. I.C. SYSTEM, Inc. (Collection Agency for #2), same as above
3. New York City, Dept. of Finance, Bureau of Tax Operations:
.... $5,866.14
(Marcia ran her own small business from our home - "Spice of Life"
4. HOUSEHOLD BANKCARD ( 4032-0080-4202-4908 ) ..... $1,000 +
owed