| --PEERgroup --Parental Equality Enforcement Resource |
| The Kirk vs. Kirk case appears to be just the tip of the Bonaventura iceberg. Check out these other documented miscarriages of justice: You'll note that the first story is from an Indianapolis newspaper. We could not find this story in the local paper, The Times. Do you think that might be because Bonaventura is on the Editorial Board of The Times? Read this story then YOU decide why the people of Lake County were denied access to it by The Times. [Bold added for emphasis] Juvenile Justice at its Worst By JAMES PATTERSON Published on Saturday, June 19, 1999 THE INDIANAPOLIS STAR / THE INDIANAPOLIS NEWS Before B.A. was born, at least one doctor had encouraged his mother not to have him. Renee D. Kouvakas is prone to epileptic seizures. Her neurologist, fearful of how her anti-seizure medication might affect the unborn child, recommended an abortion. Renee went ahead anyway. B.A. was born July 27, 1994. His birth should have been a blessing to his Crown Point family. Instead, B.A. arrived at a time when his parents' marriage was disintegrating. Less than a month after he was born, his father, John A. Kouvakas, filed for divorce. That ignited an intense custody battle for the couple's only child, created dissension within the Lake County Office of the state Division of Family and Children and has pitted a Lake County juvenile judge against the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. John was given temporary custody of B.A. on Aug. 23, 1994. The baby spent four days a week with his father and three with his mother. John's Merrillville attorney, Karen Coulis, filed for an emergency hearing on March 13, 1995, because B.A. was losing too much weight. Dr. Clark E. Kramer, assistant professor of clinical pediatrics at the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, had documented the boy's weight for nearly three months after visits with each parent. He stated that B.A. would consistently drop 2 to 5 ounces during the three-day visits with his mom and gain the weight back after time with his dad. "I am therefore recommending that overnight visitations with Renee Kouvakas be terminated and replaced by strictly supervised visitations at a neutral site," Dr. Kramer wrote to John's attorney on March 10, 1995. That did not happen. Judge James Richards of in Hammond set a May 1 hearing date but before the hearing could take place, Richards transferred the case to juvenile court, which placed B.A. in foster care on April 13, 1995, and stripped John of his custodial rights. The Kouvakases didn't understand how it could be transferred from civil to juvenile court and John's rights taken away without a hearing. Since then, John has been tormented. With legal costs mounting, he filed bankruptcy on Aug. 24, 1995. One of the creditors from whom he sought relief was his son's court-appointed guardian, Debra L. Dubovich. On Nov. 14, 1997, he had been ordered by Lake County Juvenile Court Judge Mary Beth Bonaventura to pay $75 a week in child support and 70 percent of the guardian ad litem's $22,617 bill, or $15,832. Bonaventura also awarded custody of B.A. to Renee. Even though John's Valparaiso lawyer at the time, Christopher A. McQullin, informed Dubovich and Judge Bonaventura that John's petition to bankruptcy court had been amended to include protection from the Dubovich bill, Bonaventura found him in contempt of court in June 1998. She issued a warrant for his arrest on Sept. 1, 1998, despite the fact that he had been under bankruptcy court protection from creditors since May 22, 1996. Bonaventura also ordered the arrest of John's father, Spiro J. Kouvakas, unless Spiro agreed to turn over audiotapes of phone conversations between the Kouvakases and caseworkers, tapes that could be damaging to the Lake County Office of Family and Children. The judge didn't stop there. She garnished John's wages Feb. 24, 1999. Things are at a standoff. John was placed on leave from his job at Sears because his employer tired of police showing up with warrants for him. John and Spiro are in hiding. Bankruptcy court has yet to schedule a hearing, where Judge Bonaventura's orders could be reversed. If the facts of this case seem perplexing, they are. Volumes of documents point to corruption and under-the-table deals designed to keep John from his son. -by James Petterson The Indianapolis Star / Indianapolis News The following stories come from The Times Online Lost in the Legal System October 5, 1997 For 41 days last year, as best as Edward Vaughan can figure out, he did not exist. He sat in the Lake County Jail, waiting for the call from a judge that did not come. No one in the jail could tell him when he would be summoned. No one responded to his oral or written inquiries. When his mother tried to visit him, she was told by jail booking officers he was not there. Finally released from jail, he found out he had been evicted from his rented home. His belongings were put out in the yard, where they were stolen by the people who were his neighbors. His two children, of whom he had sole custody, had been taken from him and put into Hoosier Boys Town as wards of the state after he failed to show up at their hearing because he was in jail - which no one at the hearing knew. He was forced to move in with his mother and father, who had to relocate to this area from Florida to try to straighten out the situation. No one in authority is quite sure how the system repeatedly failed the 39-year-old Highland welder, except to say it was likely someone else's fault. It all started somewhat ordinarily when Vaughan's older son, Jamie, cut class at Calumet High School late in the spring 1996 semester. The family was living in the 2700 block of Hamlin Street in Gary's Black Oak neighborhood at the time. Vaughan was notified his son had been charged with truancy and both he and his son were to appear in Lake Juvenile Court in Gary to answer the charge. As the parent, even though he did not commit the truancy, Vaughan was responsible for his son's actions. "We had a court date. I forgot or something," Ed Vaughan said. When they didn't show up, what is known as a "failure to appear" warrant was issued for his arrest. That is standard practice, and it is also standard that such a warrant carries no bond because the person is presumed to be the kind who is not too particular about showing up for court. The warrant was issued Aug. 12. On Sept. 4, Gary police showed up at his door with the warrant and took both Vaughan and son Jamie into custody. The boy went to the Lake County Juvenile Center in Crown Point, the father first to Gary city jail then to Lake County Jail, where records show he was booked Sept. 5 on the failure-to-appear warrant out of the juvenile court. What happened after that was anything but standard. That was the last the system heard from Ed Vaughan until he surfaced a month and a half later, when Juvenile Court Magistrate Jeffrey Miller ordered him released immediately. For a few days, Vaughan sat and waited for someone to express interest in him. He had called his next-door neighbor, who agreed to watch the boys. But as the days passed, he became more concerned. "I thought maybe this was the process. They (guards) wouldn't talk to me at all, it was like shut up and sit down. I told them the judge never put me there, I never seen a judge at all," he said. He began to write letters. On Sept. 24, he wrote the records division. On Oct. 2, the warden. On Oct. 4, the booking division. He did not hear back. Fortunately, he was kept in the trailer section of the jail, reserved for nonviolent offenders and trustys. He said he did not experience any maltreatment "except for a couple of times someone stole some of my food. I even made a couple friends, no one I'd invite to the house or anything, but they were friendly." People who kill and rape, rob and steal must by law be brought before a judge or magistrate within 48 hours of arrest. Vaughan, in jail for his son's truancy, got no such consideration. "One day, I'm a dad and the next day I'm in jail and I've lost everything," he said. "All this over a missed court date. Wow." Vaughan credits his parents with doggedly pursuing his case, even after being told there was no record of their son in jail. His mother, Geraldine, 60, said she became frustrated and angry when she heard that, because she had a letter from Ed that even told the cell block he was in. "They run it through their computers and said there was no Edward Vaughan there," she said. "We were sent from place to place, and at each place told there was no record of an Edward Joseph Vaughan. I demanded, I said my son's locked up in there and what is the procedure to visit him? "We went to the (jail) desk at the specified visiting time for his section, and they told me they ran Edward Vaughan through the files and they didn't have him," she said. "I said my son is in this jail someplace and you (expletive) better find him. People sitting on the benches started clapping and shouting, go get 'em mama. I was so humiliated." Is it possible to "lose" a prisoner in jail? On Sept. 22, a call from The Times to do a random prisoner check on a person known to be in custody was answered with the reply that he was not there "and he has never been in our jail." In fact, accused murderer Dayton Evans was there, and had been since Sept. 15. This was verified by the Lake County clerk's office, where one person said, "This happens to us all the time." In the criminal courts, printouts of each "in custody" defendant for each courtroom are checked to see when the next court date is. If a court date spot is blank, a computer check is made and if necessary, a call to the jail. What happened to Vaughan? Standard procedure is for the jail to notifiy a bailiff in the juvenile court when there is a person brought in on a juvenile charge, and the bailiff will be responsible for issuing a request that the person be brought to court in a timely manner. In Vaughan's case, jail personnel said the juvenile court was notified. "We keep calling and calling, letting them know. We call these bailiffs and ask and ask and ask," said Officer Thomas Ostrowski in the jail records office. "But not until we get an order can we transport him." Jail transport records show Vaughan was not taken to juvenile court until Oct. 3, almost a full month after being brought in. Juvenile Court Judge Mary Beth Bonaventura said one of her magistrates scheduled Vaughan's first court date for Oct. 3, the same day as his son's hearing, but only did so after being told by the jail that Vaughan was also in on other charges. A check of a computer record showed Vaughan was not in on other charges. His "record" consists of three traffic offenses, the last of which was disposed of on May 17, 1994, and an eviction proceeding for failure to pay rent. "It's not our usual procedure (to wait that long), but we were told he'd be sitting in jail anyway, so why not do it all at the same time? I don't agree that someone should sit in jail all that time on just a failure to appear warrant," Bonaventura said. "I feel badly for him." But even on Oct. 3, Vaughan was not seen by a magistrate. "He did not show up," she said. "He either wasn't transported or was kept in a holding cell or out in the hallway. He wasn't brought in, through miscommunication or whatever." So Vaughan finally got his day in court - and no one saw him. He was returned to the jail. On the date reset by Magistrate Miller, Oct. 15, Vaughan was again transported to Gary, jail records show. After a brief hearing, Miller immediately released Vaughan. When Vaughan went home, he found he had been evicted and his landlord put his belongings in the yard where they were stolen. Vandals had smashed all the windows out of his car and destroyed it. His sons had been taken to Hoosier Boys Town in Schererville as wards of the state. The reason Vaughan waited a year to make his story public is that he just regained custody of both his children. [PEERgroup Note: No doubt, Mr. Vaughan knew that if you anger Bonaventura or others in the system, you damn well may never see your children again.] "He really worked the program well," Bonaventura said. "He really wanted those boys back, and he came to (parenting) class consistently and he got them back." [PEERgroup Note: So you see, although there is NO hint in this article that Vaughan had a lack of parenting skills, he was ordered to take "parenting classes".] Vaughan is now living with his parents - a condition of getting his children back, because he is working six days a week as a welder. [PEERgroup Note: Single mothers in Lake County have no similar require that we can find]. When he gets his life in order, he wants to get a new place and bring the boys with him. For now, though, he is considering a lawsuit against the county. In fact, Crown Point attorney Paul Stanko - a former county judge - has already filed a claim notice with the sheriff's department, which he said was negligent and basically lost Vaughan in jail. "I think he got lost in the system," Stanko said. "That seems very clear. But I don't know how the failure occurred. The jail is supposed to be keeping track of its population at all time." Bonaventura said she wants to work on her end to get better checks and double checks. "I'm sure Mr. Vaughan is not the only person this has happened to," she said. "There needs to be more accountability." [PEERgroup Note: That's an understatement.] Authorities Deal Compassionate Hand to Casino Mom Atlanta women is reunited with children she left unattended while she gambled on boat Published 09/14/2000 09:24:17 PMBY BILL DOLAN Times Staff Writer GARY -- Authorities released an Atlanta woman Thursday and reunited her with the four children she left in her car for hours while she gambled at a Buffington Harbor casino. Gary police Lt. Dan DeLeon, commander of investigative services, said officials would not charge Rena Hitchcock, 37, with any crimes. But Hitchcock is under court order to obtain counseling. Lake Juvenile Court Judge Mary Beth Bonaventura said Hitchcock could remain under court supervision for more than a year. "The mother has been ordered to go through drug and alcohol evaluation and parenting classes," she said. "We are hoping it will be a one time thing for this woman and we can keep her family intact." [PEERgroup Note: Would a father receive the same compassionate assessment?] Police said Hitchcock left children ages 2, 3, 9 and 16 in a car parked in a valet lot Wednesday afternoon and evening outside the pavilion for several hours while she was inside gambling at one of the two floating casinos moored in the harbor. Valets spotted the car full of children, the youngest dressed only in diapers despite the evening chill, and told the teen-age child to move the car more than once, but the teen-ager kept assuring them the mother would be right out. Shortly after 6 p.m. the valets reported the teen-ager had left the children unattended. Casino security officials called in Gary police officers who immediately arrested the mother. Child Protective Services placed the children in foster care for a day while authorities decided how to resolve the case. "This is a new phenomenon for us," said Bruce Hillman, director of the Lake County Division of Family and Children. "We plan to pursue a formal protocol with the gambling casinos in handling these types of matters. We have to be prepared if it happens again." Child Protective Services filed a children-in-need-of-services request in Bonaventura's court. "Services are being provided to the family right now and they will be back in court for an initial hearing in about one month," the judge said. DeLeon said, "We figured that this would be the best. There was a 16-year-old in the car, so it wasn't leaving infants alone. She obviously needs some help. We went ahead and released her with the order signed by the judge that the kids go back to her. She is on her way home." Bonaventura said Hitchcock needs help rather than punishment. "Many people think that just because you have a child, you are supposed to know how to be a parent," she said. "Some of us just don't." Bill Dolan can be reached at bdolan@howpubs.com or (219) 662-5326. Mothers of Crack Babies Need Threat of Jail Time [PEERgroup Note: Are the threats of jail time effective? Threats proudly used by Bonaventura to intimidate 'Crack Mothers' work only as long as the threats are perceived as real. Katy Cook realized long ago when Magistrate Christina Miller presided over this case, that meaningless threats need not be followed. In this article, Crack Mothers are beginning to learn the same.] editorial advisory board column By: Mary Beth Bonaventura, Juvenile Court judge, Gary Recently I had the wonderful experience of assisting with the birth of my niece, Mira. I now have a new-found respect for my sister, Kelley, and all women who have gone through the pain and agony of bringing a life into this world. As I watched her go through the pain, I realized that the birthing process did not just begin that day, but rather began from the time of conception, through the next nine months. Kelley consumed the proper nutritious food that would go from her mouth directly to her baby, realizing that the baby's very life depended on her. She got the proper rest and exercise. She received prenatal care throughout the pregnancy. The most important fact was that Mira was born healthy; not so for four other babies born that day at that suburban Chicago hospital. Those four babies had been born with illicit drugs in their systems. Some were on monitors, while others were toughing out the seizures without machines assisting them. As I arrived at the hospital that day, I was a family member who wanted to help my sister during the delivery of her baby. As I left the hospital the next day, I left as the Juvenile Court judge from Lake County, troubled by the fact that I could not even participate in a family event without being plagued by one of the most disturbing issues I confront daily as a judge. Let me point out, however, that reading a petition in court is far less heart-wrenching than seeing the drug-addicted baby in the nursery, fighting to live. In 1998, approximately 150 babies were brought before the Juvenile Court by the Division of Family and Children because they were born with illicit drugs in their system. Under Indiana law, a baby with even a trace of a controlled substance in his or her system is defined as a child in need of services. About three babies each week, last year, were born in Lake County to mothers who ingested a controlled substance during their pregnancies. We can put people on the moon, successfully transplant a heart and direct a bomb through the door of a warehouse 5,000 miles away, but we can't win this war on drugs. Most frustrating is that when a woman is brought before the Juvenile Court through a petition filed by the DFC alleging that her baby was born with a controlled substance in his or her system, the only disposition available to the court is to ensure that the baby will receive the necessary and proper medical care, treatment, food, clothing and shelter. The mother will be ordered to submit to drug testing, psychological evaluation, parenting classes, drug treatment, unannounced drug screens and in-home services, providing there is a home and she is amenable to the services. If the mother is unable or unwilling to comply with the court orders, the child will not be returned to her. In the majority of drug mothers, the orders are seldom, if ever, complied with. [PEERgroup Note: See below where Bonaventura reverses course and says that it DOES WORK] In fact, many of the drug mothers have several other children who have either been born addicted to drugs or have been neglected in other ways. Often we have multiple siblings who are under the care of relatives or foster homes for extended periods of time, if not their entire childhood. We should ask ourselves: If someone gave a baby, or any child, crack cocaine or any controlled substance, would we prosecute them? Of course we would. Isn't it logical, then, that if a mother ingests drugs during her pregnancy that go directly from her body to the baby's, she should be held criminally liable for this act? Under Indiana law, the mother in such a case cannot be prosecuted because an unborn child is not within the definition of the word "person" in the criminal code. We, therefore, need to redefine the term "person" or create new laws which would allow the prosecutor to hold these mothers criminally liable for endangering the lives of their children through illegal consumption of a controlled substance. There is a school of thought that believes that if a drug mother is at risk of criminal prosecution because of her drug habit during pregnancy, she would be less likely to seek prenatal care. But the women who abuse illicit drugs, seldom, if ever, seek prenatal care. If they were concerned enough about their unborn children to receive medical care before their births, then they would not perform acts which would endanger their unborn children. During the 16 and a half years that I have served as a magistrate and judge for the Juvenile Court in Lake County, I have found that one of the most convincing tools for deterring further criminal behavior is the threat of jail time. It is also an excellent tool to persuade people to seek services that will help them to not recidivate, such as drug or alcohol treatment, psychological services, acquisition of an education or a skill, or just about anything that would help the person to get his or her life back on the right track. [PEERgroup note: This statement directly contradicts the previous quote above that, "In the majority of drug mothers, the orders are seldom, if ever, complied with." Bonaventura apparently doesn't get the connection that drug mothers, or anyone for that matter, won't comply with orders that are backed only with "threats" are not enforced with meaningful punishment for non-compliance. ] The people must demand legislation which identifies a woman's usage of a controlled substance during pregnancy as a crime. We cannot afford, as a community, to allow these women to continue to have baby after baby affected by their mothers' drug usage during pregnancy. It is not fair to their children or to the rest of us, since children are our future. [PEERgroup note: Wait just a minute, Your Honor. Your editorial suggests that these "drug mothers" only need a "threat of jail time". Yet you close this piece with the confession that these women are having "baby after baby affected by their mother's drug usage". If this is true, your "threats" have NOT changed the behavior of these women any more than your threats to Katy Cook have change her behavior. Finally, you claim that the "people must demand legislation" to correct this problem. Frankly ,we have the legislation already on the books. What we DON'T have in judges such as yourself, is someone with the integrity to enforce the law in a just and meaningful manner. What "the people must demand" is integrity from their judges to enforce the law, not just issue empty threats.] |
 |
|
| ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ |
|
|
| "All the cards were marked in advance. The trial was a pig-circus, he never had a chance." - Bob Dylan, Hurricane |