Championing for child victims and their protective parents | a 501(c)3 nonprofit

The Complaint Against Judge Jane Grossman: Before the Judicial Review Board

The Foundation for Child Victims of the Family Courts has been developed to advocate, litigate, and write about children and protective parents lodged in the assembly-line machinery of the juvenile, dependency, and family courts. These courts have been bloated with funding and power, yet they regularly lack the competence or the will to oversee the welfare of children and their actual protectors. 

The Problem of “Parental Alienation”

The FCVFC is most deeply concerned with the automated application of the debunked, discredited, uniformly disparaged theories of a deranged pervert: Richard Gardner, MD, who espoused the theory that children of all ages should be allowed/encouraged to have sex with their fathers.

This diabolical “Gardner Theory” has become very popular, very widely applied following the rise in power and presence of fathers’ rights groups as of the late 1990s and early 2000s.

As a result, the outrage and horror of the protective parent has been met with an even greater outrage from the court that the protective parent has “interfered” with the child’s relationship with the abuser. Their intervention is then labeled “alienation” and “coaching.”

The very mention of these terms has become enough to diagnose and prescribe intervention and treatment to the “offender” parent—the one who wanted to protect the children.

What could possibly account for such a monstrous theory having become so widely embraced across the United States?

We assert that the reasons have to do with greed, avarice and the rise of collusion in the ranks of multiple court actors, This collusion virtually guarantees that the lies asserted by one can be supported and explained by the next and the next and the next.

Richard Gardner—the Man Behind “Parental Alienation”

Richard Gardner, MD, was a forensic psychiatrist who engaged in volunteer work at New York State Psychiatric Institute, otherwise known as Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons. 

His theories designated sexual abuse as a paraphilia. He fully and descriptively reported that the increased sexualization of children would provide benefits to the culture because by having younger people giving birth to children the gene pool would be increased.

In his professional role, Gardner was called upon to evaluate a series of cases regarding custody litigation, in which claims of incest and sexual abuse of young children had been reported.

In this evaluation, Gardner had no problem constructing a defense that conveniently made no mention of his own aberrant theories.

His evaluation eviscerated the credibility of the mother by simply stating that the mother was keeping the child from “a relationship” with the father. As Gardner did not include his theories on adults having sex with children, the concept was sanitized, and the outrage against children having sex with adult men failed to make it into the court record. 

Thus began vilification of protective mothers, the rush to punish and exclude them via isolating children from their protective parent and forcing protective parents into “therapy” that instructed them how to think and speak to the child.

This new set of “court rules” has created an autocracy driven by ignorance, arrogance, and complete mind control for the specific purpose of denying the existence of heinous crimes while simultaneously handing children over to those that commit them.

In this paradigm, child abuse, incest, pedophilia—none of them exist. Therefore, anyone who calls forth such behavior is lying, or “alienating” the abuser from the children.

How the Gardner Theory Plays Out in the Present-Day Courtroom

The case before you serves as a paradigm for the most deranged, despicable form of hustling: that of hustling protective parents and children through a process that makes a mockery of the term “Child Protection,” “Human Rights,” and “Civil Rights.”

As a beginning, the case brought to the attention of this disciplinary board will address the professionals who came into contact with the Protective Parent and children who defamed, slandered, and provided provocative character assassinations. The FCVFC’s forensic team has retained the services of experts to extensively review and counter the vicious, fanciful statements made by the Plaintiff and received as truth by the court.

Judge Jane Grossman enthusiastically endorsed the multidisciplinary team of lawyers, psychologists, and Guardian Ad Litem. The fiction they created together presented a profile of the Protective Parent Mother that was “written” by the Father, Plaintiff in this lawsuit.

As will be carefully delineated, the Plaintiff Father entered this forum with a script and a plan to remove the children, whose adoption had been a lifelong plan and desire of their Defendant Mother. 

The Plaintiff, a closeted homosexual in his late 50s, is a professional writer of fiction and an actor who believes and is deeply moved by his own scripts. He has a JD degree from NYU and is licensed in New York.

Those who know him say that Plaintiff’s tears come easily to his eyes as his renditions of life in this terrible marriage with his horrible children flow freely.

Experiences that never took place are described to the team of assembled professionals, a team that the Defendant Mother never knew she hired.

The Plaintiff Father is the lone source of personal and family history and reporting in this case. But the Plaintiff’s rendition of his wife’s personal and vocational history has nothing to do with fact, and the fiction presented is horrifying, much less defamatory and libelous in nature.

Despite the Academy Award rendition of life with the Defendant, no one—not the Defendant’s lawyer, not the GAL, not the Judge—no one ever sought any facts or examined the Defendant against the demeaning, humiliating lies presented, which  were used to remove her children from her.

The children’s self-advocacy was demonstrated consistently and over time, the abuse was long-standing, and the children were eager to speak for themselves. In response, the children have been told they are liars and criminals who must be silent or they will be punished. All “mental health providers” failed their obligation as mandated reporters and participated in the victimization of the children they were paid to protect. 

The refusal of these court-appointed professionals to consider the feelings, experiences, and perceptions of three well-grounded children is astonishing and goes against all APA and health professional guidelines.

Lies and Facts in the Grossman Courtroom

The Defendant Mother is a Special Education teacher who adopted these children specifically to rescue and care for them. She has tirelessly and lovingly provided these children with every possible medical, educational, social, and psychological support for their benefit.

The adoptive Father Plaintiff, on the other hand, lived apart from the mother and three children for years. When he was fired for plagiarism and his career as a writer in Hollywood ended, the Plaintiff appeared at the household and began a new script to construct a life and new career.

Divorce proceedings were precipitated by the Plaintiff’s long standing verbal and psychological abuse, physical aggression, and harassment of the children, which then developed into a far more open life of severe and overt threat and intimidation, and a far more open climate of overt, aggressive sexual advances toward each of the children.

This Plaintiff will be shown to have exploited and used his wife and children to gain whatever front he wished to hide. This is fully revealed in the forensic research deployed to gain insight and collect evidence that he had hidden from the world so that he could engage in depraved carnal indulgences.

But now the accounts of the Plaintiff Father’s “alienation” from the children leap off the pages and inspire rage and desires for retribution against the Defendant Mother.

This fictional narrative reported by the Plaintiff Father has been adopted universally by the legal and clinical duo, both selected by GAL Hurwitz, who have indicted the Defendant as a highly pathological, unstable individual.

But as will be shown, these court actors have in fact never been presented with facts and history by the Defendant Mother. In fact, there is no record in any of the clinical or even legal providers that the Defendant has been allowed to provide personal history and attest to her truths.

The Defendant’s position in the case has been left for her to defensively respond to the derogatory fictional accounts provided by her fiction writer husband.

As will be demonstrated through exhibits, the Defendant has never been provided equal time to address personal history or discuss her narrative as the sole caretaker of the children and her account of life with the Plaintiff. 

As will be demonstrated, Judge Jane Grossman completely imbibed and accepted the Plaintiff’s accounts of a violent household where children and their mother ganged up on the father, attacking him physically, verbally, and emotionally.

Throughout the transcripts, Judge Grossman repeatedly refers to the violence and instability of the Defendant Mother and the need to provide protection from her for other family members.

The “facts” are so clearly etched in Judge Grossman’s mind, so well established, that she apparently needs no testimony from the Defendant or her witnesses. In fact, at the onset of the case, the Defendant’s providers/witnesses were fired and replaced by “therapists” of the court’s choosing, thus depriving the Defendant of due process, much less any accurate presentation of the truth.

Abuse of Process, Violations of Due Process, Engagement in Extensive Ex Parte Communication

Because it is critical for this body to imbibe the full horror of what this court and these court actors have rendered, we are laying out the dynamic of infamy, betrayal, and manipulation implemented by a group of unscrupulous court actors.

As will be presented in supporting documentation, the Plaintiff manipulated and co opted the children’s therapists. After refusing therapy his entire marriage, only when the therapists were going to report him to DCF did the Plaintiff suddenly invest in therapy–and not by a third party. He insisted seeing the children’s therapists as his own. By doing this, he moved into the sacred space of confidentiality for the child that no reputable therapist would ever have been seduced into – even for the sum of an additional $25,000 per child.

The FCVFC experts are completely aware of the ruse used by the Plaintiff to trap his children in an unholy compact. The children’s trusted therapists were Yale psychiatric luminaries whom the children loved, thriving under their care. However, these experts were all sua sponte fired.

The replacements are culpable of gross child abuse and malpractice. Their interactions with the children are known to the FCVFC to be brutal punishing, dismantling of the children’s sense of self, reality, and trust in valued relationships. There is nothing therapeutic in their forced interactions with representatives that are doppelgangers of their depraved psychopathic father.

The diagnostic statement referred to is accurate and fully supported by longitudinal fact. These facts with regard to the Plaintiff’s psyche and character are the basis for complaints against a wide variety of court actors. The concrete, united, deliberate actions of this unholy crew, assembled to remove the children from their mother, were allowed to move ahead uninterrupted by the Judge (Jane Grossman).

Among the numerous cruel acts perpetrated against the children is the ongoing isolation from all friends and family, all staples of their lives. As teens, these innocent children have been denied all relationships which have sustained them since birth. Phone calls are made by appointment only– in advance and at the discretion of the father. They must be made on his phone, on speaker, with full supervision. The world of loved ones who have raised and supported them are now vilified by this abusive father. Visits have been denied entirely. Loving grandparents, aunts, cousins, and lifelong friends have been eviscerated along with the protective parent. The schools they attended and loved were ripped away, and transfer to a new school was put in place.

We know that the children are being psychologically battered, as they are each humiliated, degraded, and irrationally punished.  “The message imparted in this situation is not going to change and you will never see your mother again.” 

We hope that the descriptions of the end product of a thoroughly corrupt process—engaged in by the court actors presented in the material being sent to this council—provides a clear picture of Abuse of Process, Due Process Violations, Abuse and overreaching authority, among other of the numerous violations of court and law committed by these court actors.

These are the court actors that assemble to organize and implement the “Parental Alienation” fiction script for the adoptive father.

The Problem of Judge Jane Grossman

The transcripts of these court hearings will clearly and specifically demonstrate the charges against Judge Jane Grossman for Abuse of Process, Bias, Negligence and Fully Depraved, Sadistic interactions with the Protective Parent Defendant in this case, and total disinterest in protecting the lives and well-being of the children in this court custody process.

Judge Jane Grossman has a well validated reputation as cruel and vindictive, withholding necessary protections for litigants whose lives are in danger, and displaying bias against non-white populations. Judge Jane Grossman’s failure to give a young Hispanic woman the Protective Order she desperately needed resulted in her brutal murder. This matter will be discussed in greater detail as we deal with the cruel and sadistic nature of this judge.

Blocking Evidence

As per the immediate subject case, Judge Grossman has blocked presentation of evidence of Domestic Violence issues, issues related to stalking, sexual molestation of the male children, and massive amounts of homosexual pornography.

The pornography “teaching” demonstrating the sexual positions that must be learned by homosexual partners is material shared by the Plaintiff with his sons. But Judge Jane Grossman did not allow it the evidence review it deserved. Her response instead was to transfer the children into the hands of their abuser and to suppress all testimony in the area of sexual grooming and sexual activity imposed on children.

No Third Party Intervention

Judge Jane Grossman went so far as to state that she did not want any third party intervention, such as Ct. DCF or FBI crime lab review of the pornography confiscated from the Plaintiff’s possession (Transcript of Fri.8/28/2020).

“The Lawyers Must be Paid”

Judge Jane Grossman directs case outcomes as per the pre-paid custody decisions of lawyers who have no interest in law or fair and reasonable services for their clients or the children at the center of these cases. In the case at hand, she refused to find even ten minutes for the affidavits of the Plaintiff Father and GAL to be cross examined. Instead, their slander was accepted as fact and and a contrived ex-parte hearing granted. Such use of the court time exploited those truly in need of the courts time during the covid crisis.

The judge also could not find a moment for the Defendant Mother to speak a single word, not one word as she was mercilessly slandered, stripped of her children, and left penniless. Yet, in August of 2020, while still denying this Defendant any due process to finish her hearing, Judge Grossman demanded a three-hour in-person hearing to force the distribution of the house sale proceeds to the attorneys and GAL who had wronged her.  

Judge Jane Grossman stated as part of passionate advocacy of all of the lawyers for the Plaintiff (we are including attorneys Callahan and Nussbaum as attorneys for the Plaintiff) that we do not need any outside intervention, we can handle this matter ourselves, and these lawyers must be paid. Judge Grossman stated that because this couple has no more money, all marital assets including the marital home must be sold and the proceeds from the sale must go to pay the lawyers.

The Defendant Mother has been denied any access to marital funds throughout the 15 months of litigation. Even though the previous judge, Judge Rodriguez, had awarded the Mother full physical custody of her children, Judge Grossman did not concern herself with alimony and child support, the rent needing to be paid or the bills in collections. Instead, she gave testimony that the mother had “excellent counsel” throughout this process, and she needed to pay them immediately.

Family Evisceration

Judge Jane Grossman is a well-known architect of the Family Separation / Family Evisceration process that takes young, vulnerable children and transfers them into the hands of their abuser, locking them away for years, if not forever.


The Plaintiff will be shown to be criminally engaged, with knowledge and forethought for planning out the court proceedings that have involved the transfer of this case from the very capable hands of Judge Rodriquez, to the fully perverted engagement of Judge Jane Grossman.

Judge Jane Goodman will be shown to have assisted in the gathering of court actors  – lawyers, Guardian Ad Litem, psychological evaluator, the team that surrounded the Plaintiff.

As will be shown through the detailed complaints against each and every one of the participants in this case, the virtual savaging these children in the isolation of the Plaintiff was to be a conscious, planned act, coordinated with, and by the planning and rulings of Judge Jane Grossman.

The acts and actions of each lawyer, subject of this complaint are also detailed in the material that accompanies this report. 

It was jaw dropping to see her enthusiastic praise for the attorneys and court process that completely removed all custody and contact with the children from the protective parent into isolation with the parent who never cared for them and was known to have engaged in hostile, exploitative acts.

A judge testifying, introducing evidence in a court hearing, directing the actions of litigants regarding marital assets, assaulting the Defendant with false accusations as to her  custom-designed psychological report, and other unusual productions is not an approved course of action.

Context for Complaints against Attorneys

Never in the course of those years did the Defendant ever anticipate that she would be fighting for her children’s lives in a court of law that is participating in the psychological torture, emotional devastation, paralyzing fear, and interrogation tactics used in wartime, as well as the sexual exploitation of her children. 

In the complaint against Judge Jane Grossman, complaints against other providers and court actors are being made as well because the coordinated efforts and acts of each of these predatory practitioners will be shown to have been accomplished with conscious knowledge, forethought, and planning to cover criminal acts that have tortured, abused, and threatened the three adopted children care for and nurtured by their Protective Parent, the Defendant.  

Detailed complaints are being drafted with regard to the numerous crimes committed not only by the court actors engaged in a sham evaluation process, but also the two lawyers retained by the Defendant, addressing their failure to represent the Defendant and the children.

Please note that every statement made in this document is supported by hard evidence and that evidence which has been sent to all relevant authorities amounts to thousands of pages, already sent and continuing to be updated.

We who are fully and completely aware of the facts of this case believe that we have presented adequate material in a manner that accurately presents the collusion and corruption in the court of Judge Jane Grossman.

Because critical facts have been suppressed, failure to act immediately may result in tragedy.

Breach in confidentiality of material contained in this report may well escalate problems, as there is reason to believe that the Plaintiff is a flight risk.

Jill Jones Soderman

Executive Director FCVFC


Get Help Today

Contact Form Demo

Related Posts

Skip to content