PA - Venue Shopping

A major characteristic of a Parental Alienator is the use of "Venue Shopping". In order to carry out their campaign, an Alienator needs to find sympathetic enforcement parties to help them limit or stop the access of the other parent(s) to the children.

An Alienator will often have a history of filing reports with a variety of police agencies (local police, Sheriff's department, State police, Homeland Security, Border Patrol, etc) as well as with CPS. They will also repeatedly relitigate custody and visitation, utilizing every court possible.

In our case, Ken Shaw used many of the above tactics in order to harass, intimidate, and develop a fraudulent case against our family.

He began with filing a false report with the Kingston Police Department on December 22, 2012. According to Ken Shaw, a friend of mine showed up at the visit with her two sons (aged 7 and 11) solely in an attempt to kidnap my youngest daughter from him. The Kingston Police never bothered to contact either my friend or me for our side of the story - they considered Ken Shaw that unreliable.

When that attempt didn't succeed, Ken Shaw contacted Homeland Security, claiming that my friend had tried to impersonate a Homeland Security agent. The agency investigated, and considered Ken Shaw so unreliable that they dismissed his allegations.

Next Ken Shaw manufactured false allegations about Jon Massey allegedly staying at my house in violation of an order of protection, and contacted the local police department with his trumped up story. He managed to gain some traction with the assistance of CPS, until we secured judicial intervention from the Family Court judge. The judge stated that if he found out that any of the parties in the family court case were involved in the original complaints or ongoing action he would take punitive action against them, and then lifted the order of protection keeping Jon from the house.

Behind the scenes Ken Shaw continued to file false reports with the Kingston Police Department, usually revolving around incidents in which he had behaved inappropriately (a gross understatement) at visitation. It speaks volumes towards his (lack of) credibility with them that not only did they not bother to contact me at all - which would have been standard procedure if they took a claim seriously - but they eventually told me that I should secure a restraining order against him through the Canadian courts.

When Ken Shaw had no success with filing reports with law enforcement, he turned to CPS both in Canada and the United States. The Canadian agency closed both reports he filed without ever contacting me, indicating that they did not take his reports seriously.

The only agency that took any action was the United States CPS. Yet despite Ken Shaw filing a report that alleged abuse of all of my children, after interviews all of them denied any abuse, except the one child who had been consistently under his control and influence, my youngest daughter.

Coincidentally, the Kingston Police reported to the US agency that they believed that the child had been coached by the father and step-mother and that she wasn't credible or reliable.

Even the initial Family Court judge did not believe the allegations brought forward, and expressed that clearly in court Then he ordered a new psychologist to evaluate the situation with my youngest daughter.

The DSS attorney ended up being sanctioned $1000 because he deliberately ignored the judges orders to have the psychologist evaluate the situation BEFORE any other evaluations and interviews. Rather than comply with the judge, CPS subjected my youngest daughter to multiple additional interviews as well as a psychological exam (by the local psychologist who receives over $185K a year under his contract with CPS) prior to allowing the judge's expert to evaluate her.

The CPS caseworker even acknowledged that she had to order Ken Shaw to stop questioning my youngest daughter, because he admitted that he was constantly questioning her about his abuse allegations.

What is ultimately indicative of Ken Shaw's lack of respect for the court process is the fact that while there was an ongoing action in the United States court, he filed for custody through the Canadian court system, a clear violation of the Hague Convention which dictates jurisdiction in child custody matters.

And of course, while under oath, when questioned about this clandestine filing, Ken Shaw lied and claimed that he "didn't know" that he had signed not one but at least two separate petitions for custody through the Canadian court, all of them alleging abuse by me - something that had never been investigated by the Canadian agency, and that had not yet been adjudicated by the US courts.

It took the US Family Court judge contacting the Canadian court directly to stop Ken Shaw's action.

This venue shopping for a "sympathetic" court is reminiscent of Susan Carrington's case - she was awarded full custody of her children,  but then her ex-husband applied to a different court and seized custody in violation of the UCCJEA (Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act) which is designed to try to prevent just this type of behavior.

As a futher "accessory" the Alienator will shop for a therapist or mental health professional that will provide them with the reports necessary to advance their expedition.

In our case, Ken and Mary Shaw first took my youngest daughter, in the fall of 2012, to a therapist who stated that there was nothing wrong with her other than needing to adjust to the abrupt change in her circumstances.

So then after the December 22 incident, they found a new professional, and on the intake interview they LIED about why they had custody, claiming that my youngest daughter had been taken from me due to physical abuse, rather than as a temporary placement while the Jon Massey case was being resolved.

The notes from the therapist even document that at every session, Ken Shaw would first give a report to the counselor of everything that I had allegedly done at the prior visit(s), then she would ask my youngest daughter about the report.

Ultimately, the final order stated that I would be allowed to send cards, gifts, and letters to my daughter through this counselor. So what did Ken Shaw do next? He removed her from counselling.

These behaviors are very similar to those of Dina Mackney in the Chris Mackney case. She found mental health professionals that would back her up, even though they failed to follow acceptable practices.

CPS engages in the same behaviors - they set up a stable of psychologists, therapists, counselors, and other professionals who provide their mandated service plan requirements. Often this is the sole or primary source of income for these individuals, so they become just another tool to give the documentation that CPS needs.

When an Alienator starts shopping, the only person getting bargains and deals is the Alienator. The other parent(s) and the children lose!

PA - Not Just for Parents Anymore!

Parental Alienation is not just limited to the parent(s) who are targeted.

When an Alienator engages in a campaign, they need to destroy all relationships that the child has with not only the target parent, but also the family of the target parent. If they don't, the child being manipulated will still be able to see and hear news of the target parent, and continue to form their own opinions.

Ken Shaw is a master of alienation manipulation with my youngest daughter. Setting aside what he did in regards to me, he also targeted my other children (her older siblings), and my other family members.

My youngest daughter has four siblings from my household.

Her oldest sister at the time of the false allegations was living and working over an hour away. But she made time to get home and spend time with her siblings at least once a month, so the little one had fairly frequent contact with her.

Her brother lived a few blocks away and was over at our house several times a week, eating dinner at least once a week and hanging out to watch movies or to go places other times.

My middle child and Ruby lived at home with the little one and me.

I am no saint, and neither are my children, although they all are very bright.

Ken Shaw deliberately targeted all of them to keep them separated from their youngest sister.

Now keep in mind, at the onset of the false allegations against Jon Massey, Ken Shaw repeatedly told the CPS workers, the AFC, my attorney, Jon's attorney, my neighbors and friends, that Ruby "was a liar" that she "told lies about his sons" and that he "didn't believe her". Not only are most of those witnesses willing to testify to Ken's statements, we even have the CPS notes that document his report to them.

But once his attorney arrived on the scene, suddenly his attitude and behavior changed. He began limiting/denying my access to my youngest daughter. He and his attorney began making false statements in court. Most importantly, he began denying my oldest two children the opportunity to see their youngest sister.

CPS made it very easy for him - they insisted that my youngest child, a US citizen who had lived in this country her entire life, be placed in Canada. Mind you, this is a Hague Convention violation which has very specific guidelines for placing children in another country. The judge and her AFC and CPS violated her rights as a US citizen. (A CPS caseworker has even come forward and stated that she should never have been placed outside the US, and worst case scenario should have been placed in a foster care.)

My oldest two children have made some mistakes in their lives, and crossing an international border isn't always easy. Canada can be very strict, and my two oldest were either ineligible, or would have to pay a $500+ bond to be allowed into the country to see their sister. That doesn't sound like much, but to a young adult with student loans and car payments it is overwhelming.

Additionally, Ken Shaw began making the false allegation that my son had told my youngest daughter that he was going to "kidnap" her and bring her home. He specifically cited a phone conversation that had occurred at a family event, in front of THREE ATTORNEYS AND A JUDGE'S WIFE, all of whom were listening and waiting to talk to my youngest daughter.

What Ken has done to my middle child goes beyond the boundaries of acceptable behavior.

In May of 2013 the family court judge (who expressed that he felt that the allegations that Ken made against me were false) permitted me to bring an adult in addition to my middle child on visitation. On one of the occasions we brought a friend of my middle daughter who was over 18 and who had spent time with the youngest one watching Disney movies.

At some point, after a confrontation in which Ken Shaw took something that one of the girls left on the table, Ken stood up in the middle of a public library, in front of the youngest child and the middle child, and began yelling at the top of his lungs at my middle child: "Your mother has molested your sister, and she molested you too! You just don't know about it yet!" He even admitted to doing so in court, but the judge's response wasn't to terminate Ken's supervision, it was to SUSPEND my middle daughter's visitation with her younger sister.

Finally, in September of 2014 we had a dispositional hearing. As part of the process, there were negotiations with Ken Shaw and his attorney regarding visitation for my middle daughter with her youngest sister. Although they had reached an agreement with my daughter and her attorney, in the hearing a matter arose over an outstanding violation petition that I had filed against Ken Shaw (for his actions revolving around and during court ordered visitation). Immediately Ken and Mary Shaw and his attorney began screaming at my daughter "If you testify in this matter, we will revoke the agreement," screaming at my daughter's attorney, "If you allow your client to testify on the violation petition, we will revoke the agreement and fight you for visitation in court," and screaming and yelling at me, "If you go ahead with this petition, we will revoke your daughter's visitation with her sister." This occurred both in front of the judge, and then continued when he went in chambers. This occurred in front of the DSS attorney, two AFCs, and the court officers. It was so egregious that on a subsequent court date when I had to be in a room with Ken Shaw's attorney, the court officer came in with me and stood by me to protect me from Ken Shaw's attorney.

Yes, I withdrew the petition UNDER DURESS. This is called witness intimidation and is a criminal offense. Yet the Family Court Judge sat there and DID NOTHING!

You would hope that it is an end to the story - but it isn't. My middle child, after all the paperwork got finalized (which took a few months because Ken Shaw decided to be less than cooperative) went to her first visitation. My middle daughter has no offenses that would cause border crossing to be an issue, and we thought it should have been a simple trip - about an hour to get there. Instead, she got pulled into Canadian Customs and her vehicle, all her belongings, and her cell phone were searched - that included searching through all her emails, Facebook posts and messages, and text messages. The Canadians claimed that it was routine, but meanwhile she was late for the scheduled visitation appointment and almost wasn't allowed to see her sister.

We thought that the second time would be easier, but she asked me to go along just in case. We had a repeat performance of the prior time, except this time they held both of us for over an hour and a half. I have been crossing the border since I was 18, and have never had these types of issues, so I began checking around. I contacted Homeland Security who referred me to Canadian Customs. We also had a friend do some casual checking on a "US customs officer" to "CA customs officer" basis and got an interesting report. Although through official channels, there was no reason either of us should be subjected to that type of behavior, the unofficial word was quite different. What we learned is that someone had given Canadian Border Patrol a document that made it appear that there was an order of protection against both me and my middle child to limit or prevent contact with my youngest daughter. There has never been such a document against my middle child, so someone apparently decided to play fast and loose with creating a false document or altering an existing one. This is no surprise - par for the course with Ken Shaw.

At any rate, after my official inquiries, the border behavior suddenly ceased. But that still doesn't mean that my daughters get to see each other as they should and were accustomed.

But there are far greater implications: An AMERICAN court and an AMERICAN government agency worked in concert to revoke and or deny the rights of not one but five AMERICAN citizens in concert with a citizen of a different country. Kinda makes you think, doesn't it?