The above picture is Mr. Anthony W. Clark. With all due respect, I refer to him as Shrink #3. (The first was Mr. Strochak. The second, Mr. Saradarian, a no show and cost me five months of delay. An overall summary will be added.)
Starting in late February of this year, 2001, I was forced to be "evaluated" again. (During this time the home study plan was done and approved. Back ground checks were done and approved. Did what they wanted an attended parenting classes.) Mr. Clark was pleasant. Decor of his office area impressive. Drove down to see him several times, about 85 miles one way. During one visit brought my daughter along so he could examine the interaction. On another, wanted to interview Bonnie Fisher, the woman who is helping me and will be staying with raising my daughter. (Most of what happened I am going to skip for now, adding at a later date.) After the final session, I asked him a specific question: How long will it be before your report is completed? He said: "Thirty days or less." Then emphasized the "or less" part. I told him I wanted a copy when completed. Shortly after my final session, he had a session with Carolyn Giannini, the foster mother, and Jodi Hertzberg, the social worker, on or about the 15th of April. Relevant to his office and the "evaluation", things seemed fine. Going on his time plan, the judge would of received his report long before the hearing date.
In the mean time, what I call phase "D" was afoot that started shortly before arrangements were made with Mr. Clark. (That will be covered in another section.) At that time, for several months, I had unsupervised visits with my daughter. I also had an ongoing investigation into what I could find out. (Example: Several months earlier, the year before, I was informed by an official from Luzerne County Children & Youth, Hazleton Office, during an interview in his office, that, more or less, what was taking place in Bucks County was a smoke screen and/or diversion. (From what I gleaned from his remarks and two other people, combined, a "sting operation" was underway.) Therefore, I was extra careful, taking all precautions, such as purchasing a cell phone for the trips. I didn't want to give them any excuse.
A hearing date was scheduled for May 29, 2001. It seemed finally the ordeal was over and I was getting my daughter.
Two days earlier, on May 27th, I brought my daughter back from an overnight visit at the usual time of 7:00 pm. (I was always at least fifteen minutes early.) That evening the Quakertown area had a bad storm . A house next to Carolyn's home, a large tree fell down blocking the street and tearing down electrical wires as over half the city was without power. I stood on her porch for about 30 minutes having small talk while waiting for the emergency crew to clean up the street. During this time my daughter was playing with hockey sticks on the front porch with the other children. At that time thought nothing of the children playing. I left and counted the minutes for the hearing to arrive.
The day of the hearing I was ambushed. Out of the woodwork came people I never seen before and during the hearing heard bizarre accusations. (That will be covered in another section.)
I asked about Mr. Clark's report. The judge, then Cynthia Ruffe, said the court didn't receive a copy yet. Jodi said, during the hearing, that Clark didn't furnish her office with a copy either.
Immediately after the hearing, I drove a short distance to Mr. Clark's office, asked him about the status of his report and he told me that it would be mailed to me that day. (Two days later I received a copy.) His report recommended I get immediate custody of my daughter. Click Here. (Coming soon.)
Piecing things together, Mr. Clark was a former supervisor with Children & Youth. The report wasn't ready? These people talk to each other everyday on the phone; have fax machines and e-mail accounts. Easy to e-mail a file and have it printed out on the other end. With agents coming and going, his office is less than 1/2 mile away from Children & Youth's office. Someone can't stop to pick up a copy? I have no doubt, before the hearing, the court already knew what was in the report.
Opinion: (Based on being there and reviewing my notes of daily journal entries.) As for a "sting operation", if things went as planned, Clark's report was never going to see the light of day. His report was done and told to sit on it. His "evaluation" was a charade while other things were being done. Like what? That night, on the 27th, at around 10:15 pm, Carolyn and her one daughter, Amanda, (the one who wants my daughter) took her to the emergency room of the local hospital wanting the doctor to examine her bottom for a "bruise". Carolyn said that I "smacked" my daughter. (After the hearing, the immediate Saturday I went to the hospital, in part, to speak with the doctor and they mailed me a copy of the medical report.)
How pathetic, how desperate, at the 11th hour, for the foster family to make up such a story. (From what I've heard Carolyn did the same to her late husband.) Do they think I would do something that stupid? Two days before the big day? If my daughter did in fact have a small, superficial bruise, it happened after I left. The children were playing with hockey sticks all trying to hit a ball. (More of this will be covered in another section.)
Getting back to Mr. Clark, I filed a complaint with the Department Of State. Below is a copy of the first reply including the complaint number.
I will be posting a copy of his report. So far, after all these months, I have not heard anything. Complaint still open.
SUPPLEMENT
At this point I am still up in the air about my final opinion of Mr. Clark. Many questions went through my mind. Did he owe a favor? Was he incompetent not to have his report done on time? Or, did he deliberately sit on the report? Should he of recused himself based on conflict of interest? Meaning, since he evaluated the Giannini family during a separate, unrelated matter within that family. I use a phrase, "In The Dark", which pertains to select players are only given limited information hoping that stereotyping, and such, will fill in the gaps, take things out of context to create bias as output generated when adding their unique part to the overall report and case file.
Example: When I took Bonnie down to see Mr. Clark, she brought a lot of documents, such as a State Certificate being a foster care provider. He was noticeable shocked and surprised because Children & Youth never told him. Bonnie stressed that they had received copies of all that she was showing him and he made copies for his file. (It seems his old pals at Children & Youth were deceiving him by omission.)
Updated: 11-28-2001