Socrates,
Thank you for the sentiments. I guess too much time has passed for me to be angry with this guy anymore, and to bring up his name. He knows he was lucky for things not to have been worse for him and I suspect he thinks things through more now than he did then.
I have been angry at the system that allows these things to happen though. I do have an educational background in the social and behavioral sciences and a decent understanding of systems and systems theory through my educational background and work experience, and I’m certain that there are systemic and structural flaws within this system that leads to lawyers being known as sharks, and an overall dissatisfaction with the legal system. I don’t know her name but within the last couple of years I heard a present or former Federal Supreme Court Judge acknowledge on one of the news talk shows that there currently existed an environment where the public was increasingly dissatisfied with the Court System particularly at the local or State level, I think. I agree, I doubt if there is anything I can do about it.
Thanks for the input and advice.

Socrates,
I thought but I forgot to say, I hope you are feeling better. Its pretty cold in my present location. Now, if I could just figure out how to get my winter clothes.
TStarkey

I’ve gone through a virtually identical situation. I think I will tell my story here in the next several days. I’m going to talk about Anthony Accorsi (AAA), Alison Copley, Andrew Jackson, Dr. Antonio Roa, Judges Yancey, Shinholser, and several other Judges, DCF, the Dept. of Revenue, the State Attorney’s office, Sandra Billings (and her parenting advice LOL), an elementary school teacher at Sun n’ Lake Elementary School, the Highlands County School Board, and the Highlands County Sheriff’s Department.

My point will be that the outcome of these conflicts is not adjudicated by the court system but is determined by this system through manipulation of the legal process.

The following comment is a cut and paste of an earlier comment made by the originator of this topic. As my experience have been virtually identical, I’ve decided to discuss my experiences in greater detail using the names of the individuals involved. However, I have chosen not to use my real name as it is my intent to discuss details of a sensitive nature involving the victims of the Court.

“Well my first attorney isn’t going to like this but let him sue away. I’ve heard older Southern people say, “You can’t get blood from a turnip.” Guess, I’m a turnip. I filed bar complaints after the Final Hearing in 12/2000. My complaint was basically that there was a conflict of interest with my attorney in that while he was representing me, he was also representing my ex-wife’s boyfriend and now husband. I didn’t learn of this until several months after I retained him. When I learned of this and brought this to his attention, he told me, “You take care of the kids, and let me worry about the legal stuff.” I trusted him and did everything in my power to take care of the kids. I had this unique job where I was given a lap top, a cell phone, and was told to come to work when I needed to. So, I had plenty of time to take the kids to their Doctors appointments etc.
I did my part of this but unfortunately, I did not anticipate that something would come up where there would be a conflict of interest, specifically, a fabricated incident that justified a domestic violence petition, where a child of this boyfriend was alleged to be a witness. Well, once this allegation was made, this created a conflict of interest and the attorney had to withdraw. No effort was ever made to prove the allegation but it did give my opponents a strategic advantage. Subsequently, the Bar has required attorneys to advise clients in writing when a potential conflict of interest exists.
After that (it had been two years) I was so frustrated with the legal process I represented myself in a 1.5 day trial. I called virtually all of the witnesses, the day care people and teachers hardly knew the mother. While I didn’t like the lawyers at that point, I still trusted the Judges. My only experience with Judges was the children’s bible I had read as a child. So, I did all the paperwork, did all of the depositions, as best I could. Well, at the Final Hearing, the Judge said, “That’s one of the finest Pro Se representations I’ve ever seen, and proceeded to throw the book at me, let my former wife’s attorney prepare the Order, which evidently included her Christmas wish list, and the Judge approved the Order as prepared. Based on the Order, I must have fallen asleep because 1/3 of what was written was never discussed. And, while the Judge heard my request and verbally ruled that retroactive child support for the time I had the kids would be awarded as “equitable distribution” to the former wife, the attorney who prepared the order refused to address the issue in the order. I intended to and would have appealed that omission but the appeal process is very complicated and expensive, and I immediately became embroiled in the welfare of my children so never followed through on the appeal.”
“Oh, and one other thing, my ex-wife’s attorney was representing the estranged wife of the boyfriend in his divorce. So my complaint against her was that they both obviously knew of these conflicts and therefore there was some collusion. Needless, to say neither complaint was successful and the Statute of Limitations has expired on any recourse from my perspective.”

The arrogant idiot who stated, “You take care of the kids, and let me worry about the legal stuff,” was Anthony Accorsi, an attorney here in Sebring. My former wife’s attorney was Alison Copley.  The Judge at this hearing was recently retired Judge Herring. My reading and experience leads me to believe that children and small animals should be thankful he is no longer on the bench. (I’ll only interject opinions when I can’t help myself.)
Lastly, I recently read a reference to anecdotal information in the paper which I thought was funny so I’ve got alot of that to bring up here. Think I’ll purge myself of 9 years of exposure to “legal professionals” here in Highlands County.

Before I go on with my harsh comments, I want to say that I had decided to let it go until my children and I were denied visitation by their mother this Christmas. I was denied even though I had agreed to pay the full costs of the round trip plane tickets. Judge Herring ordered that the transportation costs be shared equally by both myself and my former wife but I knew it was pointless to expect her to comply as she has failed to comply with most orders of the Court without consequences.
I’ll get to more substantial comments but will start with what I’ll call Accorsi(isms), or quotes made to me by my 1st attorney followed by brief commentary. One comment he made to me was, “Wassup, in law school, we learn that the ‘A’ students become corporate lawyers, the ‘B’ students become trial lawyers, the ‘C’ students become family lawyers, and the ‘D’ students become Judges. In fact when we as lawyers disagree with the ruling of the Court and appeal, we will often include among our valid arguments several arguments that we personally know are groundless so the Judge can ‘save face’.” This is paraphrased as the comment was made to me several years back but this was the gist of it.
I personally doubt the ‘D’ student assertion because I’m sure there is a cross-section of Judges appointed to the bench, some talented and some not so talented. But I do believe that “merit selection” for promotions to appellate positions as is the case in Florida in conjunction with the expectation of the Judicial Branch of State Government that their appointed Judges will have their positions for life leads to a “Peter Principle” environment. The Peter Principle is a generally accepted concept that individuals with great job security are frequently promoted or in this case appointed to their level of incompetence, and this is where they remain until retirement performing at a less than otherwise acceptable level.
As for AAA’s appeal comment, I’ve learned much more about the legal system since he made that comment to me so would be interested in seeing his record of appeals and success. Regarding the ‘C’ student comment about family lawyers, I don’t doubt that at all. It may take a special and often classless and sociopathic individual to routinely go to Court and parasitically feast on broken families. But, I seriously doubt the most competent and talented lawyers choose to make their living doing so.
Got just a few more Accorsi(isms) and I’ll move on to more substantive issues.

Here is another Accorsi(ism) somewhat related to the preceding appeals comment and may have been told to me during the same conversation. “Think of a Court ruling as a ‘hat rack’, a Judge can hang his hat on whatever arm of that rack he chooses (or whatever argument or point is made by one of the attorneys). Again, this is paraphrased as the statement was made some time ago.
This brings to my mind another Accorsi(ism) stated to me. “She (Alison Copley) would not know the truth if it ‘slapped her in the face’.” I could and will site more than one example of where I have witnessed comments she has made to the Court which were later contradicted either by her client or another attorney. I’m not sure if she would know the truth if it “slapped her in the face” or not but I would go above and beyond the call of duty to find an objective polygraph examiner and psychiatrist to use tools at their disposal to find out, if given the opportunity.
This brings me to the final point of this comment. When the Court can hang its hat on whatever arm of the hat rack it chooses, and when one attorney is willing to lie in order to win the ‘game’, and this is done in an environment where there are no consequences for lying, the court can and will make decisions inconsistent with both the truth and the “rule of law.” These decisions which are inconsistent with the truth, undermine the “rule of law.”

That’s enough on Accorsi.
My second attorney who I retained after my Final Hearing was Andrew Jackson. I understand that he is now at the end of his legal and political career but this does not mitigate in my mind his failure to properly represent me or the interests of my children from 2001 - 2003. When we finally got to Court for a modification request based on very justifiable reasons in January 2003, the following occurred:
He took what I believe in the world of boxing is called a “dive.” He didn’t bother to exchange witness lists with Copley. He did not effectively cross examine the witnesses she had developed, some of which he should have called himself, and he otherwise seemed unfamiliar with the police reports and other supporting documentation that were presented. He didn’t have a Court Reporter present as I had repeatedly asked him to do which leads me to believe that his actions were much more than simply incompetence. He also failed to ask the Court for a Guardian ad Litem when based on my understanding of the Florida Statutes, the facts supported the appointment of one.
In my case, Andy acted in his own interests as a politician, and not in mine, as my attorney. Perhaps my expectations are higher than some others but I personally do not think he is fit to act as a local leader or an officer of the Court.

A summary of physical custody, child support, and other facts in my case until this point in January 2003 is as follows:
For the first 15 months after the separation, I had physical custody of both children in the maritial home but never received a dime in child support. According to the child support guidelines, I should have received approximately $7500 from my former wife. When I asked for this award at the Final Hearing, Judge Herring ordered that this money would be awarded to my former wife as “equitable distribution.” However, because in Florida the victorious attorney prepares the order, and over my objections, this issue was never addressed in the initial Final Order from this hearing in November 2000. At this Final Hearing in November 2000, I was ordered by Judge Herring to send all of the childrens clothes and additional furniture that I had acquired for the children to my former wife despite the fact that retroactive child support was never addressed.
At that point the children’s residence was changed and I was given an alternate weekend and Wednesday night until 9pm visitation scedule, and was ordered to begin paying Statutory child support. Well, the children immediately began to have problems with inadequate parental supervision etc..,. in their new residence and I at that point did not have the money for an attorney so made my 1st request for the appointment of a Guardian Ad Litem. Naturally, this request was opposed by my former wife. At the hearing I requested for this appointment, Judge Herring denied my request stating as he raised his hands out palms facing upward, “You win some, you lose some.”
Approximately one year later, one of my children made allegations to her teacher and later that evening to the Highlands County Sheriffs Department that she was being sexually abused while at her mother’s residence. The deputies interviewed everyone at the residence and based on these initial interviews decided to remove both children from the home. Unfortunately, unlike when and where I grew up, mothers here in Highlands County in the 21st Century all to frequently side with the perpetuaters rather than their children when allegations of this nature are said to have occurred in their homes.
One fact that I will interject here is that Alison Copley just by chance became involved in this allegation immediately. The morning after one particular serious incident, my child made her initial report to her teacher. Within minutes by chance, Alison dropped off her child in the same classroom. My child had just told her teacher what had occurred and had done so because children were being taught in school at that time to tell someone they trust when something of this nature occurs. Alison along with the teacher were observed going to a back room which was visible to the classroom and discussing this allegation. At this point, neither I nor the police had been notified of the allegation and therefore no intervention had taken place. This was the first reporting of the issue and apparently it went no further than Alison Copley.
According to DCF records, this allegation was never reported by the teacher or the school to DCF as was legally required. According to police reports, the allegation was not reported to my former wife, and it was not reported to me. I’ll finish the rest of this later but I will say now that three weeks went by before the Highlands’ County Sheriff’s Department had a physical exam conducted of the victim. My attorney at the time was Andrew Jackson.

wassup,

Just wanted to let you know that there are people reading your story.  I hope that you are archiving your posts.  I wonder how much influence the “old guard” has with the administrator of this board and Highlands Today.

Thank you. I’m not sure what the legal issues are but the administrator has let me express my views freely here. I’m sure there are a myriad of issues, freedom of speech, slander (or liable, I don’t know which), etc.., but I think it helps that these statements I’ve made are true and verifiable. They would know much more about these things than I would. My personal feeling is that when it comes to the forum, they are maintaining a “hands off” position and letting the issues be discussed freely. I appreciate that and hope it will stay that way.

oops

stablemaster,
They are archived now. I would like to say that I’m communicating with individuals privately who share at least some of my views on the subjects discussed here and in the other topic. Thanks.

Where was I? O.K. Just to clarify, later in the evening, my child reported this incident to me stating that she was afraid that it would happen again that evening. I then reported it to the police who went out to the maternal residence, interviewed all of the residents and based on this initial investigation took both of my children out of the house.
As I stated, the Highlands County Sheriff’s Department waited three weeks to have a sexual battery physical exam conducted. Based on my discussions with the victim, I wasn’t overly concerned about the results of the exam as I knew that my child had successfully resisted the efforts of her alleged attacker where direct but only external physical contact was alleged. But, according to the investigators the allegations met the definition of “sexual battery.” During the following three weeks, the Sheriff’s Dept. conducted an investigation and during this investigation interviewed the maternal grandmother, members of the custodial household, and a “mental health professional,” Sandra Billings. Alison Copley had selected and insisted that this individual counsel the children months earlier due to problems the children were having adjusting to their custodial home.
Statements made by these individuals and included in the police reports were infuriating to me. According to the police investigative report, Sandra Billings made a statement to the investigator that this type of behaviour had been reported to her during counseling sessions months prior and that she did not know whether the allegations were true or not. Residents of the household, excluding the children, and the maternal grandmother stated that they had made observations that would lead one to believe that any evidence of sexual battery could have either been self-inflicted or could have occurred in the course of bathing with a younger sibling.
Ironically, when the exam was conducted, there were no indications of the reported activity and there should not have been any physical evidence based on the allegations. My only concern with the way the Highlands County Sheriff’s Department handled the investigation is that if a nine year old child is going to be emotionally put through a physical exam of this sort, I think it should be done immediately or as soon after the alleged incident as possible to ensure that even the slightest sign is detectable. In the end, according to the State Attorney’s Office and the investigator, it came down to a “he said she said” case and no charges were filed.