A Texas Family Court judge granted custody of Anne-Christine’s son to his father, who had confessed to murdering her in a most sociopathic way right in front of the boy.
Children may not be property of fathers on paper anymore, but Anne-Christine’s case is a good example of how the old boys have ensured perpetuation of this most coveted patriarchal perk in practice.
In 2010, when Anne Christine and her first husband divorced, he was given primary custody of their young son, even though she was his primary attachment figure. Not surprising.
She got involved in a new relationship and became pregnant the next year. The father was furious and demanded she get an abortion, but she refused. He began to abuse her physically and emotionally.
A few years later, their son was diagnosed with autism and the father is again angry, blaming Anne-Christine for his condition. He filed for divorce.
In 2014 Judge Barbara Roberts granted shared custody between the paternal grandfather, which is bizarre and probably not even legal. Anne-Christine was deprived of custody, despite the fact she was the child’s primary attachment figure and caregiver, demonstrating Roberts couldn’t care less about the best interests of the child. He got only two hours a week with his mother, supervised.
Shortly after this, the father smacked Anne-Christine across the face with a gun and strangled her to the point she couldn’t breathe, all while threatening to murder her by slitting her wrists and saying he would make it look like suicide.
I thought he was going to kill me. I begged for my life and as soon as he let me up, I ran out of the apartment as fast as I could, barefoot.
Anne-Christine
FLIPPING THE SCRIPT
The father called the police and “flipped the script” leading to mutual restraining orders, despite the physical evidence clearly supporting Anne-Christine’s story. The D.A. refused to prosecute, saying it wasn’t clear who the aggressor was; and, unsurprisingly, CPS left custody with the father.
Anne-Christine missed her baby so much, she moved back in with the father so she could be with him. Shortly after that, she told her friend he had strangled her again.
Her mother, Stephanie, was increasingly concerned for her daughter’s safety and warned her that strangulation often preceded murder, but she could not live without her baby, so she stayed.
Less than a month later, Anne-Christine disappeared. Stephanie asked the police to search the father’s home, but they refused, choosing to believe his story that she had left. Stephanie and the community began a search for her and with the media attention, the police finally searched the house and found her body in an advanced state of decomposition.
The father eventually confessed to stabbing Anne-Christine and putting a plastic bag over her head, suffocating her to death while telling her he wanted to watch her die. He was arrested and jailed.
A MURDERER GETS CUSTODY
Judge Roberts granted the father’s request that his father have primary custody and he secondary, even though he was in jail for murdering the mother.
Stephanie had not been noticed of the hearing and when she found out, she filed a motion for custody. Judge Roberts issued a summary judgment (no hearing) declaring Stephanie didn’t have standing to file. Stephanie appealed.
In 2017, the confessed murderer was released from jail on bond with no restrictions placed on him for being with his son, who witnessed him murdering his mother. He retracted his confession, saying it was coerced.
A year and a half later, the appellate court ordered mediation in which Stephanie got two mornings a month with her grandson, supervised, but is given the right to file for custody in another county.
SUPER-SWEEETHEART DEAL
In 2019, the father pled guilty. He was facing over 100 years in prison for murder and tampering with the body, but the judge granted him a super-sweetheart plea deal and he will be released from prison in just eleven.
Just before Stephanie’s motion for custody was scheduled to be heard in 2020, the grandfather filed a motion to adopt the boy, now 10, with the imprisoned murderer father ceding his parental rights to him. The new judge, Judge Kerri Foley, ruled the custody trial would occur before the adoption case.
COVER UP
Tired of continual delays, Stephanie filed for temporary custody and a hearing was scheduled for March 21st. However, her case got local mainstream media attention and the grandfather filed a motion for a gag order and sealing of the record.
Judge Foley did not allowed to attend the March 21st hearing, which is illegal, indicating she is siding with the paternal family in a cover up of the wrongdoing in the case. Testimony was taken at the hearing, but it was continued to May 15th when Foley will rule on temporary custody, the gag order and the sealing of documents.
But the father, though his father, still holds the cards. Even in the unlikelihood that Stephanie is granted temporary custody, it can still be changed back at the final trial. Worse, even if she gets custody, the adoption by the grandfather will make things more difficult for Stephanie.
Watch this page for updates…
WOMEN’S COALITION VIEWS
Anne-Christine’s case is a perfect example of a father being able to take a child away from a mother and the maternal family even if he is a sociopathic domestic violence perpetrator or murderer. And his power extends to the paternal family.
Why?
Children have been property of the father for 10,000 years, and men were not about to give up that patriarchal power when they lost control of wives. So the old boys created the Family Court system, which is designed so judges can continue this entitlement.
Unfortunately, the recent investigative reporting did not identify the real nature or cause of the crisis, as usual. Although women are spoken of as the victims, the “advocates” interviewed identify the Family Court crisis as “Safe Parents” unable to protect children from abusive parents.
To Be Clear: There is NO crisis of “Safe Parents” losing custody to “Abusive Parents”. There is only ONE crisis: Safe Mothers losing custody to Abusive Fathers. This needs to be clearly identified so an effective solution can be achieved.
The gender-neutral portrayal of “parents” losing custody to “abusers” diverts from public understanding of the true cause of the crisis: systemic entitlement of men and discrimination against women.
The solutions proffered by these advocates—more training for judges and court officials, and new DV and child safety laws—will not make any significant difference since they don’t fix the essential problem that judges are deliberately ignoring facts and violating the law in order to entitle and empower fathers.
Join The Women’s Coalition to help fight for a new system in which judges do not have the power to take and endanger our children.
You can also contribute to our cause through PayPal.
Join the Global Dialogue on Social Media:
In re deciding the CUSTODY of CHILDREN, PLEASE W O R K to END judges doing so.
W O R K and PROTEST O N L Y for = = = . J U R Y . - DECISIONS in re kiddos' CUSTODY.
cuz Dr K Millett's p 33 - statement of her Sexual Politics of long ago ( y1970 )
WILL BE .T H E WAY. of CUSTODY DECISIONS ... ... F O R E V E R MORE. E L S E.
“ Patriarchy's chief ( THAT, Women, is C H I E F ) institution is ... ... THE FAMILY.
It is both a mirror of and a connection with the larger society;
... ... a patriarchal u n i t within a patriarchal w h o l e.
As the fundamental instrument and the foundation unit
of patriarchal society, the family and its roles are ... ... P R O T O T Y P I C A L. "
I'm going through something like this idk what to do I have a lawyer but I can't pay for him and so I get left with public defenders who play with our lives