NH Attorney Lenora Boehm Receives Six Month Suspension - From The Professional Conduct Committee After Kimberly Frederickson Files Complaint - From The Website Of The NH Bar Association

Bar News - March 19, 2010 (Click Here To Go To NH Bar Website And View Original Article)NH Supreme Court Professional Conduct Committee

Boehm, Lenora E. advs. Kimberly Frederickson # 08-055
Summary of Six Month Suspension
With Three Months Stayed with Conditions For Two Years
(effective April 1, 2010)

On January 19, 2010, the Professional Conduct Committee deliberated this complaint against Lenora F. Boehm, Esquire, and issued a six month suspension with three months stayed for two years, with the stayed three months not to be imposed if the Respondent meets certain conditions during that two year period. The parties stipulated to the facts, and rule violations of Rule 8.1(b): Failure to Cooperate, and 8.4(a): Misconduct. The parties also stipulated that Ms. Boehm would pay all costs of the investigation and prosecution of this matter.

Kimberly Frederickson filed a complaint with the Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) against Ms. Boehm, alleging misconduct stemming from Ms. Boehm’s representation of her ex-husband. The matter was docketed and Ms. Boehm was asked to respond to a letter dated December 11, 2008, from the ADO, to which Ms. Boehm did not respond. The ADO sent a second letter on January 13, 2009, and the Complaint Screening Committee sent a third letter on February 13, 2009, informing her that the complaint was being referred to Disciplinary Counsel for further action on both the failure to respond to a disciplinary authority and on the merits of the complaint. Ms. Boehm took no action until she filed her answer on July 13, 2009.

Ms. Boehm’s failure to respond to the ADO’s correspondence represents a knowing failure to respond to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority, a violation of N.H. Supreme Court Rule 37A(II)(a)(5)(C). In view of the seriousness of Ms. Boehm’s misconduct and her prior recent and lengthy disciplinary record, it is the Committee’s view that the public can be protected, public confidence in the Bar can be maintained, and the integrity of the legal profession can be preserved only through Ms. Boehm’s suspension with conditions.

This matter is of public record, and available for inspection at the New Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office, 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102, Concord, New Hampshire 03301.

NH Professional Conduct Committee Finds Attorney Lenora E. Boehm Violated Her Obligations To Communicate Properly With Her Client – From The Website Of The NH Bar

Bar News - September 5, 2008 (Click Here To Go To NH Bar Post)NH Supreme Court Professional Conduct Committee

The New Hampshire Supreme Court Professional Conduct Committee deliberated the matter of

 

 

  Ms. Boehm negligently violated her obligations to communicate properly with her client.Ms. Boehm’s negligence caused her client to suffer needless anxiety.

Ms. Boehm was retained by Robin Marble on or about August 22, 2006, to represent her in a divorce. Ms. Marble paid Ms. Boehm a $3,000 retainer on or about August 22, 2006. Ms. Boehm filed an appearance on or about September 7, 2006. Ms. Marble met with Ms. Boehm on October 23, 2006. Following that meeting, Ms. Marble made numerous phone calls to Ms. Boehm. Ms. Boehm did not return any of Ms. Marble’s telephone calls, or otherwise communicate directly with Ms. Marble. Ms. Boehm did not respond to Ms. Marble’s emails in January, 2007 through April, 2007. Ms. Boehm did not respond to Ms. Marble’s request for a full refund of her retainer, to her request for a refund of the balance of funds, or to a request for an itemized bill for legal services. On or about March 14, 2007, Ms. Marble retained subsequent counsel. Subsequent counsel filed an appearance on March 26, 2007. Ms. Boehm filed her withdrawal on or about the same time.

The Committee determined that the following findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record, and accepts the Stipulation as to the facts that:

The Committee found that there was clear and convincing evidence, and accepts the Stipulation as to the Rule violations that Lenora E. Boehm violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.4; 8.1(b), and 8.4(a).

Ms. Boehm was issued a Public Censure with Mandatory Diversion, and assessed all costs associated with the investigation and prosecution of this matter. The mandatory diversion component of the sanction requires Ms. Boehm to undergo an office management audit and comply with all recommendations of the auditor.

This matter is public record, and available for inspection at the New Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office, 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102, Concord, New Hampshire 03301.

August 25, 2008Boehm, Lenora E. advs. Robin Marble #07-018, and issued a Public Censure with Mandatory Diversion on July 21, 2008.

Boehm, Lenora E. advs.
Robin Marble #07-018

PUBLIC CENSURE WITH MANDATORY DIVERSION SUMMARY

NH Guardian Ad Litem Board Finds That Attorney And GAL Lenora Bohem Violated GAL Rules – Six Month Suspension Issued

Our blog received an email that NH Attorney and Guardian Ad Litem Lenora Bohem was suspended by the GAL Board for misconduct.  In looking into the matter we found the following which is an excerpt from the GAL report.  The whole report can be viewed by clicking on Boehm-Lenora-sept2010. 

The Board has found that Ms. Boehm has violated Gal 503.16 (a) by failing to disclose disciplinary actions imposed by the NH Supreme Court’s Professional Conduct Committee in her application and supporting affidavit.

Blog Reaches 25,000 Page Views Today

Today the blog has recorded over 25,000 page views in a little over a year.  Wow!  It's like a train picking up momentum.  Once the train picks up speed don’t get in the way.  Get on board or be run over.  Be ethical when you are a public servant or be exposed by this blog. 

There is so much corruption out there that needs to be exposed and we doing it. 

We are reaching out to and informing lots of readers about issues involving Judicial Child Abuse and Neglect.  We are exposing unethical abusers of the court system and proud of our work.

Help to keep up the momentum.  Keep your tips coming in on unethical attorneys, GAL’s, Judges, Marital Masters or anyone else that is participating in Judicial Child Abuse or Judicial Child Neglect. 

Who In The World Is Ed Mosca? - From The Website Of NH Corruption Watch

Who in the world is Ed Mosca?

Just who is Ed Mosca? Well, a quick glance at his caseload will reveal that he is not in very high demand as a lawyer. He typically handles N.H. Bar referrals of low-income litigants typically fighting for "big purses." He often works on contingency and a look into some of his motion practice, reveals that he is apparently not very intelligent.

One of his former clients reports that he "bailed out" at the last minute before a hearing, leaving the client "high and dry." This type of unethical behavior is evidently not uncharacteristic of Ed Mosca.
In another case, apparently Ed Mosca has engaged in unethical behavior that has put him on the hot-seat before a Family Court for alleged contempt practices and violations of the N.H. Professional Rules of Conduct.

Now, as counsel to the N.H. General Court, Ed Mosca has apparently brought his inane and disingenuous antics to the State House.

N.H. Corruption Watch will be keeping a close eye on Ed Mosca, and will be sharing its findings relative to his practices and conduct as information become available.

In the mean time, email nh.corruption.watch@gmail.com.


Eric Davidson
N.H. Corruption Watch

Judicial Child Abuse Blog Runs Article About NH Attorney And Guardian Ad Litem Tracy A. Bernson - It Appears Bernson Owes The IRS Nearly $30K In Unpaid Taxes!

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Judicial Child Abuser, Attorney & GALTracy A. Bernson: Deadbeat Tax Evader

Investigators from the STOP! Judicial Child Abuse research department have uncovered a federal tax lien levied  against Judicial Child Abuser, Attorney and  GAL Tracy A. Bernson.  Her New Hampshire Bar Identification number is: 15562

It appears from the "Notice of Federal Tax Lien" filed August 214th, 2010, that Attorney & GAL Tracy A. Bernson owes the IRS nearly $30,000 in unpaid taxes!

It is abundantly clear exactly why Attorney & GAL Tracy A. Bernson regularly files "Motions to Exceed Fees" in cases to which she is appointed - she needs to pilfer money from the N.H. Judicial System to pay her own back taxes!

Our researchers are currently investigating all cases to which Tracy A. Bernson was appointed as Guardian ad Litem to determine the extent of the fraud that she has been perpetrating upon the N.H. Judicial System.

It is the opinion of STOP! Judicial Child Abuse that potential or would-be clients of this Judicial Child Abuser and tax-evader avoid doing business with this evidently unethical, corrupt, law-violating practitioner.

 

Recent Changes To Blog - You Can Now Follow Us By Email And Easily Track The Amount Of Page Views

Two recent changes have been made in the format of the blog.  As you will see on the right hand side there is option to “Follow By Email” and an animated counter to track the amount of page views since the beginning of this blog in September 2010.  Now you can get email alerts when new information is posted by signing up for email alerts. 

In addition, we are proud to announce that we are nearing 24,000 page views since the beginning of the blog fourteen months ago.  These unethical people are being exposed. 

Do you know of a NH Judge, Marital Master, Attorney or Guardian Ad Litem that is unethical but you are afraid of retaliation if you provide information about this person?

Do you know of a NH Judge, Marital Master, Attorney or Guardian Ad Litem that is unethical but you are afraid of retaliation if you provide information about this person? 

Post anonymously the persons name in this post and their position and whom they are associated with.  The blog staff will investigate this person.  Please provide as much information as possible to assist us in our research.  If you can tell us a little bit about some areas to look into that would be a great help. 

Additional information on the unethical people already posted would also be appreciated. 

Thank you,

Blog Staff

NH Attorney And Guardian Ad Litem Has Issues With Depression - More Disturbing Information Found On Tracy A. Bernson - Article Published In The Syracuse University Post-Standard On June 23, 2001 Discusses Her Major Depressive Disorder

 The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY)

June 23, 2001 Saturday Final Edition

STUDENT SUES SU UNDER DISABILITIES ACT SUIT SAYS LAW SCHOOL SHOULD HAVE ADJUSTED FOR HER CONDITIONS DURING TEST-TAKING.

BYLINE: Jim O'Hara Staff writer

SECTION: LOCAL; Pg. B5

LENGTH: 499 words

Tracy Bernson recently completed her first year of law school at the Syracuse University College of Law. But she's already headed for the courtroom.

She won't be there as a lawyer, though. She'll be there as a litigant because she is suing SU, claiming the university violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate her in taking her final exams last month.

Parental Alienation Condoned By Attorney Jaye L. Rancourt, GAL/Attorney Douglas A. Thornton, Marital Master David S. Forrest, and Judge John P. Arnold (Part 2)

(To Read Part 1 Click Here)

I think back to time when I would listen to Kenny Loggins song Return to Pooh Corner and proudly look upon my sleeping children.  The hard thing to get over is how Attorney’s like Jaye Rancourt, GAL’s like Doug Thornton, Marital Masters like David Forrest and Judges like John Arnold stole it all away from me by the roles they played in helping my ex-wife to alienate my children from me.  I have read from others that it’s like mourning for your children’s death but you know they are still very much alive.

These people are responsible for seeing that I will never get a chance to watch my children grow up.  They are the ones that played the biggest role in condoning my ex-wife’s parental alienation behavior by rewarding her. 

I have heard some justify parental alienation by saying that it might just be a mother protecting her children, just as these corrupt people I am sure have justified it in their own minds.  What are these people protecting the children from?  I never abused my kids.  I was always there for them.  I was often complimented by my ex wife’s family for being the great dad until the divorce when my ex declared an all out smear campaign.  Then I was portrayed as incompetent and selfish.  A man that thought of their own needs before they thought of their children’s needs.  This is utter nonsense.

Was I selfish when I decided to put my foot down and tell my ex that I was tired of her years of abuse and I didn’t want the children to keep on being in the middle?  Was I selfish for wanting to get away from the physical abuse my ex-wife inflicted upon me?  Was I selfish when I had enough of my ex calling my friends, my family, her family and my boss and telling them I had a “Chemical Imbalance.” 

Erik G. Moskowitz of Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell PC of Concord, NH – Another Unethical Attorney

From my dealings with Erik G. Moskowitz my opinion is an oath means nothing him.  As with all people, there are good people and bad people.  There are good attorneys and bad attorneys.  Erik Moskowitz in my opinion is not only a bad attorney he is a bad person.  I have had the pleasure of personally dealing with Moskowitz during an unemployment hearing. 

Moskowitz purposely misrepresented facts of the case and his misrepresentation of the facts has violated my constitution rights.  He is representing a municipality in NH where his key witnesses lied in their testimony.  When he was shown physical proof of his witness’s lies by me, he refused to act appropriately and professionally which at minimum he should have told his client he had to recuse himself for a conflict of interest.  Instead he continues to perpetuate the lies and hide the truth.  How can an attorney represent someone when he has knowledge that they lied in their testimony?  How can an attorney continue to cover up lies at the expense of an innocent person? 

I confronted the law firm of Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell about their Jr. Partner misrepresenting facts and representing a client that he knows to have lied in testimony.  I was blown off which supports my suspicion that the law firm is just as unethical.

Erik G. Moskowitz’s unethical behavior makes him deserving of being on the Unethical “Wall of Shame” located at the bottom of the page. 

Attorney Cynthia P. Gilman, Manchester, NH Added To The Unethical “Wall Of Shame”

The following is a post from the blog NH Judges Are Sodomites at the following link: http://nhjudgesaresodomites.blogspot.com/2010/12/cynthia-gilman-lawyer-refuses-to.html.  This post earns Cynthia P. Gilman the honor of being on the Unethical “Wall of Shame” at the bottom of this page. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Cynthia Gilman, Esq.: criminal member of the NH Bar

While there's good reason to suspect the NH Bar Association is just as self-serving as the rest of the judicial branch, but somebody has to take a stand for my son's rights. His mother sure as hell won't, and her hyper-zealous lawyer is even less likely to do so. For facilitation of contempt and the child abuse of parental alienation, this corrupt, criminal and downright reprehensible "attorney at law" ought be disbarred. The following complaint has been notarized and mailed to the Professional Conduct Committee:

1. This grievance is against Cynthia P. Gilman, Esq. of The Law Offices of Cynthia P. Gilman, at

40 W. Brook Street, Manchester, NH 03101

.
2. I am the Respondent in the case XXXXX in the Cheshire Superior Court.
3. The Petitioner, is being represented by Cynthia P. Gilman, Esq. of Manchester, NH.
4. False statements of material fact by Cynthia P. Gilman, Esq.:
- a. In a Motion to the Cheshire Superior Court, Cynthia Gilman made impossibly false “statements of fact,” maliciously implicating the Respondent as being several months in arrears on support.
- b. This action is directly counter to N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 3.3(a)(1), “A lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer.”
5. Wanton act to facilitate contempt and acting as an accessory to child abuse:
- a. On December 16, 2010, the Petitioner filed a motion for and was granted a temporary restraining order against the Respondent.
- b. On December 22, 2010 the Petitioner was explicitly Ordered by the Lynn District Court of Lynn, MA that she was to abide by the Parenting Plan set forth in the matter of 08-M-0302.
- c. At 4:51pm the Respondent contacted the Petitioner's counsel, Cynthia P. Gilman, Esq. by phone regarding visitation pursuant to the Parenting Plan.
- d. During this call it was indicated that Atty. Gilman had contacted her client; while at the same time informing her client that defying orders of visitation would be an act of contempt, Atty. Gilman explicitly stated, “I recommended to my client that she not show for visitation.”
- e. To make matters worse, this recommendation to refuse to facilitate visitation comes the day before the Respondent was to spend Christmas Eve with his son; through this disgraceful action, Cynthia Gilman has acted directly as an accessory to both contempt and alienative abuse of the parties' 7-year-old child.
6. The Petitioner had a history of bad faith conduct leading to several Contempt findings against her; it is likely that she was counseled made this recommendation with knowledge that Contempt, even of visitation matters, carries virtually no weight in the Cheshire Superior Court.
7. The actions of Cynthia P. Gilman, Esq. are abhorrent acts of child abuse; furthermore, N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 3.4(a)(c) clearly states, “A lawyer shall not knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists.”
8. A “valid obligation” pursuant to a Parenting Plan not only existed in New Hampshire, but was strongly reaffirmed by the Lynn District Court.
9. As a member of the Bar in both NH and MA, Attorney Gilman ought to recognize her obligation to the law and the Orders of the courts, but instead stated a belligerently steadfast refusal to act in accordance with those Orders.
10. Attorney Gilman's actions, having been perpetrated with knowledge that her counsel was to commit an act of contempt and fraud against a Court, simply cannot be a more clear violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(a), “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly or induce another to do so, or through the acts of another.”
11. Attorney Gilman's actions, are counter to Rule 8.4(b), as she has perpetrated a “criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer.”
12. By recommending that her client commit a willful act of contempt, she has disregarded Rule 8.4(c), “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”
13. Through recommending a contemptuous act to her client, Attorney Gilman has taken violation of Rule 8.4(e) to a new extent, not only implying an ability to achieve results, but in fact actively guaranteeing results “by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.”
14. Bearing the title of “Esquire” ought imply that admission to the Bar holds one to a higher standard; this clearly contemptuous and abusive behavior from an “Attorney at Law” disgraces and disreputes the entirety of the legal profession, and the New Hampshire Bar as a whole.

Attorney John J Cronin III Joins the Unethical “Wall of Shame”

I know of someone that is dealing some post divorce issues with their ex.  Their ex is represented by Cronin.  Cronin appears to be using unethical tactics to drive up the cost of litigation.  I will keep you posted as more information becomes available. 

I recently came upon some information on Attorney John J. Cronin of Bennington, NH which prompted me to add him to The Unethical “Wall Of Shame.”  This information was from the Mass.Gov website http://www.mass.gov/obcbbo/bd08-086.htm.

________________________________________________________________

NO. BD-2008-086

IN RE: JOHN J. CRONIN III

S.J.C. Order of Term Suspension/Suspended entered by Justice Botsford on September 29, 2008.¹

SUMMARY²

On February 26, 2008, the respondent John J. Cronin III was suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire for six months, all of which was stayed for two years subject to conditions that the respondent take and pass the Multi-state Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE) within one year, submit his financial records to random audits, and reimburse the Professional Conduct Committee of the New Hampshire Supreme Court for the costs of investigation and prosecution. The misconduct giving rise to this sanction is as follows.

During an audit of the respondent’s trust account, a staff auditor for the Attorney Discipline Office of New Hampshire discovered that the respondent as a matter of practice deposited retainers paid for services to his operating account prior to earning those retainers in full. The retainers remained in the operating account, and the respondent returned the unearned portion of the retainers and otherwise properly accounted to the clients at the conclusion of the case. The respondent’s failure to deposit the retainers to a trust account violated Rule 1.15(a) of the New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct.

The respondent also committed additional misconduct in handling a domestic relations case and the execution of a will. In the domestic relations case, the respondent kept a check for $23,866 representing disputed funds in the matter in his office for three weeks before depositing the check to an interest-bearing account. In the matter involving the will, the respondent signed the client’s will as a witness and left his office prior to the client’s appearance at the office and execution of the will in front of the other witnesses. The respondent’s conduct in the first matter violated New Hampshire Rule of Professional Conduct 1.15(a) and, in the will matter, Rule 8.4(c).

The respondent failed to report the suspended suspension to the Office of Bar Counsel. On September 4, 2008, bar counsel filed a petition for reciprocal discipline in the

Supreme Judicial Court

for Suffolk County. Subsequently, the parties waived hearing and assented to an order of reciprocal discipline, which was entered on September 29, 2008.

FOOTNOTES:

¹ The complete Order of the Court is available by contacting the Clerk of the

Supreme Judicial Court

for Suffolk County.

² Compiled by the Board of Bar Overseers based on the record filed with the

Supreme Judicial Court

.

Motivation For My Blog - I’M DOING IT FOR MY TWO BOYS AND FOR ALL THE CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILYS THAT HAVE BEEN AFFECTED OR WILL BE AFFECTED BY PARENT ALIENATION - I Want Others To Be Able To Learn From History. Parent Alienation Is Child Abuse And It Needs To Stop!

Someday, my two boys will realize that their Dad loves them unconditionally and their mother played a significant role in keeping them from me by using Parent Alienation techniques. 

NH like all states has Child Abuse Laws.  There are also laws that mandate who has to report suspected abuse.  These laws are great but they fail to consider Parent Alienation abuse.  Below is a quick overview of the law. 

New Hampshire Child Abuse Laws

Code Section	169-C:3, 169-C:29, et seq.
What Constitutes Abuse	Sexual abuse, intentional physical injury, psychological injury such that child exhibits symptoms of emotional problems generally recognized to result from consistent mistreatment or neglect, or physical injury by other than nonaccidental means
Mandatory Reporting Required By	Physician, surgeon, medical examiner, psychiatrist, optometrist, psychologist, therapist, nurse, dentist, chiropractor, hospital personnel, Christian Science practitioner, school teacher or official, social worker, day care worker, foster/child care worker, law enforcement official, priest, minister, rabbi, any other person
Basis of Report of Abuse/neglect	Having reason to suspect that a child has been abused or neglected
To Whom Reported	Department of Health and Human Services
Penalty for Failure to Report or False Reporting	Knowing violation: misdemeanor

Right now, Parent Alienation (PA) is not considered child abuse in NH.  I am not sure if other states have made movements to make PA a form of abuse.  I suspect some states have had movement to make it abuse or are in stages of defining PA as abuse.  Because PA is not defined as child abuse in NH, there is no law requiring people to report it.  That means that our children who go to school, church, the doctors office, etc, never receive the benefit of being rescued by the Alienating Parent. 

We need to change the laws on PA.  There are lots of studies that show that it’s real.  Aside from studies, IT’S JUST PLAIN COMMON SENSE.  Mess with a young person’s mind and they will have issues their whole life if not treated by years of counseling. 

I hope that people will read my stories and learn from what has happened to me.  I hope that any alienating parent that reads my blog will think twice about what they are doing to their children.  Alienating a child from their parent may not immediately hurt as bad as hitting the child but someday the pain will be unbearable to them.  How do I know?  I am witnessing what it has already done to my children.  Children need both parents.  What will the cost of PA be to our children?  One can only imagine.  Some children will recover.  Some will overcome it.  Some will not.  Some will be effected by PA their whole lives.  Some I’m sure will even commit suicide because of it. 

If you have children and you read this please do me a favor.  Give them a hug for me and my boys and tell them that you love them.  Don’t ever speak ill of their other parent in front of them or to friends and family who will repeat your words.  No matter how much you may want to. 

Family Court In NH Is A Joke – Marital Master David Forrest Is The Ringmaster Of A Three Ring Circus

In Master Forest’s Three Ring Circus first comes the bickering, his deciphering and then men’s suffering. 

In looking back at my divorce file I noted a lot of things that were interesting.  My Alienated children can someday look back at what Forrest did to them and thank Forrest for devaluing their father and empowering their mother, an Alienating parent who thinks of her needs over her children’s needs.  I have records in a safe place and someday when my kids are older, I will let them look through the records so that they can learn the real truth and not the lies that their mother has filled their minds with. 

First of all Forrest made a lot of decisions on hearsay and testimony with no evidence presented.  Keep in mind that in a divorce, the burden of proof is the preponderance of evidence.  Not proof beyond the reason of doubt.  What does this translate into?  Whoever has the better story and who ever is more believable wins.  The burden of preponderance of evidence gives people like Forrest too much leeway and too much power.  They can totally ruin a person if they see fit to.  For the common person you don’t have the resources to fight it.  It is so costly you will end up bankrupt before your divorce is done and plan on a two year fight.  This is the atmosphere that Forrest encourages.  He like conflict.  I think he feels empowered by it. 

An example of Forrest poor judgment is, my ex told Forrest that she paid for my $10k college loan and told Forrest that I didn’t work much.  He liked her story.  She provided no physical evidence.  Just her testimony.  Forrest in his decision stated he believed what my ex-wife had said. He took her word over mine.  Why? He is a biased man hating pig.   I told Forrest when I testified that I have records that prove my ex was lying. 

I have records from the government showing that I paid off most of my loans prior to our marriage and the government paid off most of the rest when Bill Clinton signed a law reimbursing police officers on their student loans for service as a full time cop.  I brought this up to Forrest at the hearing but he decided that I was lying and took my ex wife’s testimony as gospel.  Call me a liar now Forrest.  I have your written decision and I have the records in my possession and can prove what I say is true. 

I also have my statements from SSN. When I was married, I made more money then my ex did.  How is that possible for a low life blood sucking leach that Forrest portrayed me out to be?  In his decision he portrays me out to be a man whore that worked part time and was unemployed most of the time when in fact I worked long hours with lots of overtime to support my ex wife’s spending habits.  Oh that’s right, my ex told him I was a deadbeat husband and again he believed her. 

When I questioned my ex in court, I caught her in several lies.  She testified that she never called State Police on me.  I provided Forrest a State Police Report where my ex called and spoke with a Trooper inquiring how she could legally get me out of the house.  The Trooper asked if I was abusive to her or the kids in which she stated no that I was not.  The trooper told her there was nothing he could do for her.  My ex’s response was that was what her attorney told her (This was her second attorney and not Jaye Rancourt). 

I had to deal with this kind of crap and maintain my job as a cop at the same time.  Forrest should have given me a medal for being able to deal with my while maintaining my job.  My ex totally denied that it was her who called this Trooper and spoke with him.  My ex in my opinion is sick but let me tell you, she knew what she was doing.  Her moves were calculated. 

If you are going through a divorce, learn about personality disorders.  Many people have them.  If you can learn about personality disorders, it may help with your situation if you can understand what you’re dealing with. 

Just remember, a system that allows a person like Forrest to make decisions on the preponderance of evidence is bound to fail.  People like Forrest abuse their power.  If you have a contested divorce in front of Forrest and you are a man, I would recommend that you ask him to recuse himself from the case due to his being biased.  Forrest does not have the ability to be fair to men.  I have had numerous people contact me because of this blog and they tell me their stories of how Forrest abused them and condoned giving full custody of their children to the alienating parent.  I hope that my stories about Forrest unethical behavior will help others to deal with their divorce and custody issues.  Anyone wanting to contact me with their stories or for assistance can be assured that I will keep there identity anonymous. 

Douglas A Thornton Listed On NH Guardian Ad Litem Board’s List – Listed As “Expired or Renewal Denied” – How the State Of NH Protects Those Working For The State That Have Enormous Power To Destroy Lives And Yet The State Refuses To Give The Public Access To Information About These People

Here is a list that was published by the Guardian Ad Litem Board in NH.  As you will note, Douglas Thornton is listed as “Expired or Renewal Denied.”  This document is available at the following link. http://www.nh.gov/gal/documents/BoardCertifiedGALs-Alpha.pdf

CHANGES IN GUARDIAN AD LITEM STATUS

Changes through December 8, 2010

Suspended:

• Lenora Boehm

• Marsha Lavallee Huntoon

Newly approved

• Lynn Aaby

• Arlene Agosto

• Tracy Bernson

• William Cleary

• Margo Cooper

• Tina Craig

• Anna Elbroch

• Kristen Finnegan

• Carleen Forrest

• Barbara Gardner

• Aprel Goddard

• Lucinda Hopkins

• Robin Partello

• Elizabeth Rodd

• Laura Vaillancourt

Expired or renewal denied:

• Michael Atkins

• Dianna Baker

• Lisa Bellanti

• Paul Bennett

• Floreen Keifer-Bishop

• Quentin Blaine

• Barry Bolduc

• George Bortnick

• David Braiterman

• Peter Brigham

• Susan Brown

• Peter Brunette

• Deborah Buxton

• Cindee Carter

• Mark Cavanaugh

• Karen Collman

• Clark Corson

• RoAnne Cronin

• Timothy Cunningham

• Gail Cyr

• Susan Denenberg

• Elaine Dolph

• Daniel Dwyer

• Edmunds Everett

• Michael Finamore

• John Fox

• Patricia Frim

• Christopher Garner

• Matthew Garthwait

• Jill Gaumont

• Kim Gaumont

• Michelle Gosselin-Limire

• Tammy Gosling

• Joan Gross

• Margaret Cunnane Hall

• Marianne Hannagan

• Jeremy Harmon

• Patrick Harrigan

• John Harwood

• Honey Hastings

• Tricia Hayes

• James Hurley

• David Kamen

• Kathy LaRocque

• Marcia Leighninger

• Thomas Mandra

• Jeanette Marino

• Steven Markiewicz

• Elizabeth Maynard

• Barbara McCracken

• Glenn McCracken

• Andrea McCusker

• Robert McKenney

• Norma Micheroni

• Fred Miller

• Kathy Needleman

• Deborah Shepherd

• Douglas Thornton

Someone contacted the GAL board for information and here is their response. 

1^st Request For Information From GAL Board

Hi:
I recently noticed that GAL Douglas Thornton is on a list of "Expired or renewal denied." as for changes through December 1st 2010.  How do I find out information about this?  I would like to know what information is available to me. 

Thanks

1^st Response To Request

Good Morning,

I am not sure what information you are requesting, so I am including the dates of any status changes for Mr. Thornton. I reviewed Mr. Thornton’s file and found that he was originally certified by the Guardian ad Litem Board on March 13, 2006.  His certification expired on March 13, 2009.  He did apply for Guardian ad Litem Certification again in the summer of 2010; however, the board denied his application on September 24, 2010.  He is not a board certified GAL, and has not been board certified since his original expiration date.   

If you are looking for something more specific please let me know and I can try to get that information for you if it is indeed public information.  The reasons for denial are not public information.   

Thank you,

Katherine

GAL Board Secretary

2^nd Request Asking For Information

Thank you for your speedy response.  You answered most of my questions.  Specifically, I am assisting a friend with some post divorce issues.  Doug Thornton was the GAL.  It would be helpful is we could find out why Mr. Thornton's application was denied as there could be some impact on the post divorce issues.  I am a little confused why that information would not be open to the public under the NH Right to Know law and if it is not subject to right to know, how could someone find out?  A petition to the court?  Subpoena?  Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. 

2^nd Response To Request

The reason for denial is exempt from right to know requests pursuant RSA 91-A:3 II(c), and cannot be disclosed.  If he had requested a hearing to challenge the board’s denial of his application, then the information would have become public, but he did not.  I am a secretary, and I am unaware of how you would force the release of exempt information, but I think it may be through the Supreme Court, but you may want to get some legal advice on that.

If you are under the assumption that the reason for denial stems from a complaint about Mr. Thornton as a GAL, I can inform you that all disciplinary decisions regarding GALs are posted to the board’s website under the complaints section.  I do not see that any disciplinary action was ever taken against Mr. Thornton.

If your friend wishes to file a complaint against Mr. Thornton, there is paperwork available on the Board’s website under the complaints section.  However, it should be noted that the board can only handle complaints against certified GALs, so if the time period during which the violations took place was after Mr. Thornton expired, then the complaint would need to be directed to the court, and she would need to contact them as to how to file a complaint.

Thank you

Katherine

GAL Board Secretary

As you can see, the secretary in quite polite in her response.  She notes that the reason for Thornton being denied his certification is not subject to the right to know laws.  Here is a person that has caused a great deal of destruction to two young boys and God knows who else but you can’t find out why his application was denied.  Do you see something wrong with this?  What is the GAL Board covering up?  Thornton created a lot of problems for my divorce, he was biased and negligent in the way he handled the case but I can’t find out why he was denied his certification. 

Someday my children will become adults.  They will someday realize that their father did everything he could do to be in their lives but had his rights taken away by a sick mother that breeds on Parent Alienation as well as her attorney Jaye Rancourt, a negligent GAL Douglas Thornton along with Master Forrest and Judge Arnold. 

Cheshire County Judge John P. Arnold and Marital Master David S. Forrest Fail Surveys On The Courthouse Forum!

It’s pathetic that we have Judge’s and Marital Masters in Cheshire County that rate so poor on surveys.  The NH Judicial system needs a reform.  It’s too bad we can’t vote these people out of office like they do in other states.  

If you go to the Courthouse Forum with the following link:

http://www.courthouseforum.com///forums/directory.php?letter=a

You will be on a page that has Judge John P. Arnold’s score.  Arnold received a D- rating. 

Click on the F tab to go to Forrest.  He rated slightly better with a D+. 

It is no wonder why Cheshire County Superior Court has so many issues when it comes to the marital division.  Please go to the Courthouse Forum and take the survey. 

An Example On How Attorney Douglas A Thornton of Surry NH Unethically Runs His Law Practice – He Prides Himself On Being A Guardian Ad Litem That Is Smarter Than An Eight Year Old!

I recall speaking with Attorney Douglas A. Thornton of Surry NH, during my divorce.  He was the court appointed Guardian Ad Litem.  I repeatedly told him that my ex-wife was doing everything in her power to alienate the children from me.  I explained how she was making things up and that she was using the kids against me.  Thornton doesn’t believe in Parent Alienation. 

Thornton I remember told me that he was smarter than an eight year old (my oldest son’s age) and knew how to question him to get his answers.  Maybe Doug Thornton can go on the show “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader.”  It would be truly amusing. 

Doug Thornton questioned my sons alright.  He played right into my ex-wife’s warped mind and got all the wrong answers.  As I posted in a previous article, my ex-wife, the one who in my “opinion” has multiple personality disorders.  Thornton was told by my attorney that there were counseling records obtained in discovery from my ex-wife and in our opinions, she was diagnosed with multiple personality disorders and was refusing to be treated.  I remember Thornton’s response all too well.  He said that the records came too late for him to consider them for his findings and he also didn’t have the expertise to interpret them.  Shame on Doug Thornton!  It was his job as GAL to look into the counseling records.  His actions aided my ex-wife in alienating the children from me.  He is incompetent as a GAL and an attorney and should be disbarred. 

I remember listening to Doug Thornton in court speaking to one of the court officers and making a joke of his job.  He said that he had a good routine.  As a GAL he was paid by divorcing parties and as a bankruptcy attorney, he would get paid by these same people at a later time when they had to file bankruptcy.  Does this sound unethical? 

Doug Thornton approached me in court after this comment and asked about the remainder of my bill that I owed him.  I owed him a small amount of money.  I explained I was doing my best but had been experiencing extreme financial hardship.  I had noticed in documents that my ex-wife had paid Thornton very little and she owed him a considerable amount of money.  When I asked him if he would work with me he became irate and threatened to bring me to court and to have me found in contempt of court.  I stated to him that my ex-wife according to his records had hardly paid him and he said that was none of my business. 

I realized some months after my divorce was finalized and I had paid Thornton’s bill that I had no records to show that my debt was paid.  I contacted Thornton and asked him for a final statement.  He became irate with me. 

Below is the first and second email I sent him politely asking for a statement.  Read the emails from the bottom up to follow the conversation.   All correspondence has my name blacked out to protect my minor children.  Read from the bottom to the top to follow the conversation. 

Thornton responds after the second request and states he is busy and is avoids the request.  I then send him another email telling him that I find it ridiculous that he billed over $5,000 for his services and can’t understand why I can’t get a statement.  Thornton then accuses me of throwing my weight around as a police officer.  I have to email him back and tell him I am no longer working as a police officer.  Read the email below and start from the bottom and read to the top. 

So after this bullying email from Doug Thornton, he writes me a letter and sends it to me in PDF format.  He asks me to give this to my current attorney.  I find the third and fourth paragraph disturbing. 

In the third paragraph, Thornton justifies not giving me a final statement since in the past I questioned why he was singling me out and telling me he was going to file court action against me for owing a few hundred dollars when my ex-wife owed him thousands of dollars.  Thornton states that he makes no determination whether it is profitable to pursue fees and he knows of no law that requires him to spend time to collect on a bad debt.  I know I paid Thornton in full.  What does he mean by this?  It appears to me that he may have overbilled me and is letting my ex-wife get away without paying.  Do you see a problem with this.  A GAL that would do this is UNETHICAL. 

In the fourth paragraph, Thornton defends himself as I had stated to him that I had counsel (Which my counsel was dealing with some post divorce issues and wanted me to get up to date records).  I never told him what the counsel was for.  He made an assumption it was to file a lawsuit against him.  Why would Thornton think this way?  From my experiences it’s because he did something wrong.  See the letter below.

So now that you have the facts, do you think this attorney is unethical?  Do you think he has something to hide?  You definitely do not want to give this guy any business.  He will do to you what he did to me.  I feel like he robbed me blind.  As a GAL My opinion is that he is incompetent.  I have had specialized training on questioning children.  When I asked Thornton on the witness stand if he had any training on forensic questioning of children he said no.  I believe it.  So what do you think?  Is Douglas A Thornton smarter than an eight year old?