Louisiana Voice

When Family Court Judge Dawn Amacker ordered a teenager sent to a Utah boarding school not unlike north Louisiana’s former New Bethany Home for Girls in its methods, citizens of St. Tammany Parish were moved to start an Operation SaveVictoria web page in an effort to change the judge’s mind.

The details leading up to the judge’s edict were unusual, to say the least. Her father, Dr. Farhad Aduli, was a St. Tammany Parish cardiologist. A citizen of Iran, he was in this country on an H-1 work visa, court records show. Her mother, Valerie, was from France and was here on an H-4 visa as Farhad’s spouse.

He had spoken of the possibility of finding work at the Texas Medical Center in Houston after obtaining his green card. In early 2008, he purchased a condo in that city and Valerie moved there in January of that year. Exact details devolved into a he-said, she-said with her saying Fardad planned to join her there but denied he ever planned to move to that city.

Despite the separation, he continued to pay the mortgage and utilities and to give her $1,000 each month for living expenses and, according to Valerie, he would visit “two or three times a month, for four days at a time.” Not so, he said; the visits were perhaps every month to month-and-a-half.

Regardless, when he visited, they slept together but were never intimate because Fardad confirmed about a month before she filed for divorce that he had engaged in at least one extramarital affair—and she “did not want to risk becoming pregnant by a man she did not trust,” according to records of the 14th COURT OF APPEALS in Houston.

Fardad was ordered to pay Valerie’s attorneys’ and experts’ fees and both parties were forbidden by a restraining order from “making any withdrawals from any checking, savings or brokerage account in any financial institution, for any purpose,” except as authorized by the trial court—an order repeatedly violated by Fardad over the next year.

The couple did have a daughter, Victoria, and that is where Judge Amacker came into the picture.

In 2012, Victoria had lived with her mother her entire life to that point and Fardad had not been in his daughter’s life for at least the first five years of her life nor for the two years leading up to his move to obtain full custody and that she be sent to a “troubled teen” program called Diamond Ranch Academy in Hurricane, Utah, according to Louisiana’s FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL.

Diamond Ranch is just one of upwards of 100 such facilities operating in Utah at the time and survivor accounts told of extremely abusive disciplinary policies, isolation and sexual abuse. Amacker ordered both parents to tour the facility and ordered Valerie to “encourage” her daughter to enroll there.

After reviewing the contract Victoria’s mother was concerned that she would be required to sign away her parental rights, and reasonable access to her child. She was also concerned that the clause to allow DRA to “discipline” her daughter in any manner they saw fit might give them permission to abuse her. She was not comfortable with signing such a document that could very possibly put her child in danger. She was advised by both the DRA survivor community and her lawyer not to sign anything. She did try to file an appeal on the court order, but it was denied, and by that time she was just out of options, so she did the only thing she had the right to do, she refused to sign the DRA contract.

Because of her refusal to sign the DRA contract, which also would have waived rights to legal recourse in case of Victoria’s injury or death, Diamond Ranch rejected Victoria’s application and Amacker promptly slapped Valerie with four counts of contempt of court for failing to “encourage” her daughter to attend, for refusal to sign a contract and for instigating an internet campaign to overturn a court order. Valerie was sentenced to 30 days in jail for each count, to run concurrently, with all but seven of the days suspended and ordered her to pay a fine of $100 for each count, a total of $400.

Additionally, sole custody of Victoria was awarded to Fardad who then moved to send his daughter to a second home, Copper Canyon Academy in Arizona (now known as Sedona Sky Academy).

In 2014, the First Circuit reversed all four of Amacker’s rulings in the case.

One might think a sitting judge would do a little better job of vetting these out-of-state boarding schools, especially after the bad publicity surrounding the New Bethany Home for Girls, which was operated in Bienville Parish by Rev. Mack Ford from 1971 to 2000 and Rebecca Home in Texas operated by Ford’s mentor, preacher Lester Roloff.

Plus, heiress Paris Hilton, who was placed in a Utah home, has led efforts to have the homes shut down, even testifying before Congress of the hardships she faced there.

One girl, Harley, told of her experience there:

“All of my things were taken from me except for my tennis shoes. I was told some basic rules for observation and assessment and then sent outside with the other kids. During O&A, we were outside all the time except for sleeping or if it was too cold. We had to use port-o-potty because using indoor plumbing apparently was a privilege. We were not allowed to speak at all unless we raised our hand and got permission first.

“Everything we said had to be “on-task,” meaning we could only ask relevant questions or ask permission to do things. We couldn’t stand, sit, take a drink of water or even put our hair up without permission. We weren’t allowed to look in mirrors. We had to walk in straight lines everywhere and count when we went through doorways. We also had to count while using the toilet or shower. Showers were three minutes long in O&A but extended to five whole minutes afterwards. I didn’t wash 90 percent of my body the entire year I was there because I didn’t have time.

“In O&A, we had to haul around a cattle cart a couple of times a day and do manual labor outside. Because it was in Utah in the summer it was excruciatingly hot. Because of this, we were forced to drink nearly a gallon of water every day. If we there wasn’t enough time, we would chug it to avoid getting cited. Bathroom breaks were at set time and if we had to go outside those times, we would get cited. We often held our bladders both in O&A and in the main program, so UTIs were common. If we got too many citations in one day while in O&A, our time would be extended. O&A was a minimum of 14 days. We weren’t allowed any contact with our parents until we got “inside,” which means out of O&A and in the general population.

“We had to complete the Responsibility Motto. We would stand and say it in unison before every meal. If that sounds cultish, that’s because it was.”

Still another girl had this story about Copper Canyon Academy in Arizona:

“I was 16 years old when I woke up to two people in my room—a retired police officer and a beefy woman. I was very confused. I did not have a top on and was only wearing bottoms. The man threw a shirt at me and told me to put it on and that it was time to go. Terrified, I put the shirt on, while trying not to expose myself to two strangers. I stood up and asked who they were [and] the man threw me to the floor, face-first because it was “a sign of aggression.” My nose was bleeding into my mouth and he had my hands pinned behind my back. He dragged me screaming out of my house and into a car. They told me they were taking me to a “school and that my dad has hired them to take me. They called themselves escorts. I was crying uncontrollably and hyperventilating in the car with my own blood smeared on my face and in my hair. The warned me not to run because they would catch me.

“Once we arrived at the school, they had a sign that read, “Welcome Ashley.” This was when my six-month nightmare begins. They gave me a red shirt to wear [and] I was not to look at or talk to anyone else wearing a red shirt.

“We had this thing called “treatment team” where all the teachers, staff members and therapists would get into a room and talk about your “progress.” They would sit in a circle and the student would have to come in and stand in the middle. Imagine standing in the middle of a circle of adults telling you how manipulative, evil, misbehaved and just a bad person you are. It breaks you down.

“Work hours consisted of moving rocks, pulling weeds, scrubbing toilets or cleaning floors with a toothbrush. Multiple girls tried to kill themselves while I was there. Copper Canyon tried to chalk it up to mental illness but we know it was because of the severe emotions, verbal and sometimes physical abuse that we experienced.”

There was more but you get the drift.

Diamond Ranch was eventually shut down after several children died there.

Diamond Ranch Academy ordered to shut down after child’s death

Read Full Post »

LouisianaVoice has received numerous complaints about the abrasive manner in which a St. Tammany Parish family court judge conducts her court but the latest one takes on ominous implications in that her honor reportedly refused to view photographic evidence of alleged physical abuse of a child.

While it’s one thing to anticipate some grousing from the aggrieved party in court proceedings—you expect that because one side always loses—it’s quite another when the attorneys begin complaining about bias or ham-handed rulings by presiding judges.

And that’s what we’re getting more and more often: complaints from attorneys who grumble bitterly but privately that a particular judge favors certain attorneys and ignores compelling evidence. Of course, those attorneys don’t wish to give their names because they still must ply their trade before these same judges.

But one who consistently generates complaints about unfairness, bias or just plain rudeness is the Hon. Dawn Amacker, judge of the 22^nd Judicial District’s Division L and who is described on the 22^nd JDC’s web page as being “instrumental in the establishment of the 22^nd JDC Family Court” and “one of the first two judges elected in 2008 to the division of the 22^nd JDC that exclusively hear Family Court cases.”

Amacker has been the subject of growing whispered criticism for some of her decisions involving custody of children.

One such case involves a mother who said her husband was convicted of second-offense abuse after being booked on four separate counts—two for abuse of the couple’s daughter, the other two of the mother of the child. His first offense saw him found guilty of three counts after two others were dismissed. One of the two counts thrown out, the mother claims, was for child endangerment.

In Amacker’s defense, child protective services was never called for that first offense. The district attorney’s office allowed the child endangerment charges to be used for him to enter a plea for the 894 Diversion program so he would not lose his rights, according to the child’s mother.

“The court ordered investigations by a child advocate from the sheriff’s department and Department of Family Services,” the mother said. “Both ruled this case as child abuse. Amacker refused, while in her courtroom, to make a logical, common-sense decision and sent all three of us back to [a clinical psychologist],,who in early 2005 recommended to the courts that my ex (before his custody rights were restored) seek a psychiatric evaluation and diagnosis, long- term treatment for OCD and anger issues.”

The mother provided LouisianaVoice with half-a-dozen photographs that revealed injuries to the child. Because of the child’s age, we will not publish the pictures which show bruises and abrasions to his head, face, arms and legs that the mother said were caused by the father. “When I tried to tell the judge, I was told to shut up—that she didn’t believe a word I said,” she said. “He literally beats my son and is getting away with it.”

Not only did Amacker award full custody to the father, but she also ordered the mother to pay $350 per month in child support. “I was served with it (the order) by email,” she said. “I also was ordered to pay all court costs—and I don’t have a job.”

Why would a judge refuse to examine evidence of child abuse in a custody case?

There are no clear answers but court observers say flatly that certain attorneys coming before family court judges never seem to lose. One attorney said if a certain attorney is representing the adversarial parent before a particular judge, “I won’t even take the case because it’s a waste of time and effort.”

The term “court observers” is somewhat misleading, however, because family courts traditionally do not allow those with no connection to a case to remain in the courtroom. Sometimes, they even clear the courtroom of family members in order to confer with attorneys for each side. No one really knows what goes on in such cases but normally, one attorney—not those mentioned earlier who tend to be favored—will emerge with a “deal” that in reality is anything but a “deal” for a parent who has spent tens of thousands of dollars fighting to maintain custody of a child only to be told they have no choice but to bend to the judge’s wishes.

The alternative, besides being hit with court costs and losing custody, could be jail time. How do you fight a system like that?

In this particular case, the mother says her ex-husband’s attorney “threatened my non-local attorney and myself that if we didn’t go along with what ‘they’ were doing that day and went before Amacker, she always favored the dads. She actually told us that. So, the bullying worked and a consent judgment was signed. My ex-husband’s family is very wealthy and they’ve threatened me for years they’d do whatever it takes to win and take my child away from me.

“I’ve spent more than $45,000 in court costs and legal fees and not once has Amacker made him (her former husband) be responsible for my fees.”

Her ex-husband’s attorney was suspended from practice for three years by the Louisiana State Supreme Court for neglecting legal matters, failure to refund unearned fees and failure to property supervise his non-attorney staff in an unrelated case.

Tomorrow: Judge Amacker removes teenage girl from mother’s custody and awards custody to a dad who had never developed any kind of relationship with his daughter. The father, a physician, promptly had Judge Amacker send his daughter to a Utah home for problem girls. That home was subsequently closed down by the State of Utah after a child died there.

Read Full Post »

Uh, yes, Speaker DeVillier…that’s exactly what it means.

In our LouisianaVoice masthead at the words, “It is understandable when a child is afraid of the dark but unforgivable when a man fears the light.”

After Donald Trump was elected in 2016 (and, unfortunately, before the newspaper was purchased by Jeff Bezos), The Washington Post adopted the slogan “Democracy Dies in Darkness” for its masthead.

The New York Times masthead slogan dates back a few years further. Adopted in 1896, it says simply, “All the News That’s Fit to Print.”

Even the weekly Shongaloo Tattler, if it existed, might have “World News Guardian” plastered at the top of Page One.

That’s all because newspapers, since the days of old Ben Franklin, have been the backbone of this country’s informed citizenry.

Gov. Jeff Landry, in his inaugural address in January 2024, called TRANSPARENCY the primary goal for his administration.

He lied.

We had warnings. As attorney general, he sued a Baton Rouge Advocate reporter for submitting a public records request to his office. He even tried to pass a law saying only Louisiana citizens had a right to public records. He tried to get Bob Mann fired at LSU because Mann had the temerity to criticize Landry for sending a flunky to a meeting at LSU to address Landry’s opposition to Covid mandates. Seeing the writing on the wall after Landry was elected governor, Mann resigned on that same inauguration day.

Now we learn that Landry required that at least 121 state employes sign NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS (NDAs) with his office. That number does not include your legislators (77 Percent of state Senators and at least a dozen House members) local police jury, school board and city council members who are almost certainly parties to this shroud of secrecy being pulled over public information about the machinations of government.

We’re still learning the extent of that requirement. For instance, there’s the big one between Landry and Meta on that $50 billion-dollar data center in Richland Parish. We don’t know what’s in that agreement, of course; all we have are Meta’s promises which are probably about as reliable as those of Trump.

The fact is, there is only one reason for an NDA: the concealment of information from the public. That’s it. No other explanation is possible.

Oh, the Landry administration did offer one very weak explanation. Executive Counsel ANGELIQUE FREELsaid the restrictions prevent workers from sharing sensitive government information with lobbyists and other private parties who Louisiana ethics rules may not cover.

Since when is Landry concerned about ethics? Other, that is, than passing HOUSE BILL 674   (which became Act 301) last year which made it more difficult to penalize public officers for ethics breaches and which increase Landry’s control over the ethics board. Does that sound like more transparency? Well, it did leave Landry so transparent Stevie Wonder could see through him.

The sudden—and apparently unanticipated—disclosure of the NDA practice has sent legislators diving for cover. SEN. BOB HENSGENS (R-Abbeville) claimed he had decided not to sign an NDA prohibiting him from discussing a potential aerospace project in Vermilion Parish, according to a story in the Louisiana Illuminator.

But he did just that. He received a call from Louisiana Economic Development on July 20 informing him that he was, indeed, under a “general NDA” with the state agency. He said he must have signed the document without reading it because he still did not remember doing so.

That’s quite a comfort, Senator. Do you always sign documents without first reading them?

Now, according to KATC-TV in Lafayette, some Senators are attempting to back out of their agreements. They are Hensgens, Valerie Hodges (R-Denham Springs) and Bill Wheat (R-Ponchatoula). Joining them is State Rep. Joy Walters (D-Shreveport).

Loath as I am to use this analogy, it isn’t until you switch on the light that the roaches run for cover. I am not calling legislators roaches, mind you, but you seldom see lawmakers scatter in unison until the spotlight is on them. Just sayin’.

Read Full Post »

 Iran has a strait. The Trump administration doesn’t have a pair.

–The Wall Street Journal

Read Full Post »