By Dr. Leon Koziol
Parenting Rights Institute
Author’s Note: The term doctor is necessarily employed to distinguish between the role of PRI Director and practicing attorney. This summary reflects the former and is not intended to convey legal advice particularly with the censorship and targeting we have endured. A family judge went so far as to issue a gag order on this site but it was removed after we obtained a show cause order against him in New York Supreme Court. This post will explain, in major part, why we have been so persecuted by our own courts.
Help us take this post viral
In recent posts here at Leon Koziol.com, we introduced segments of our new report which reveals alarming misconduct in the divorce and family court industry. This report opens with a focus on discriminated fathers based on Census Bureau statistics which still show that they are nearly 85% of all parents paying child support well into the 21st Century. Empirical evidence also continues to show how fathers unlike mothers have been effectively criminalized by this industry without commission of any crime.
This report is already well received on its first day of release, May 1, 2018 (with final editing yesterday). It is available on request but we must necessarily focus on those capable of supporting its reform goals through networking, marketing skills and donor contacts. The report summarizes twelve years of reform and whistle blowing activity involving countless moms and dads victimized by this system across the country. The censorship and retributions have continued to reach epic proportions, and it may be coming to a head very soon based on some of the emotions registered lately.
Critical to our success as aggrieved parents is a united front, one that is being promoted by Mark Young and others behind a Mothers Day rally in Washington D.C. We sponsored similar rallies in our nation’s capital at the Supreme Court on Fathers Day Eve, 2015 and a Founding Fathers March in 2011. Unfortunately the turn-outs were far short of our goals, and even though the Washington Post and other major media contacted us regarding our news conferences, no major news stories resulted, thereby leaving the custody and support epidemic escalating in scope.
That is why major funding is needed. The report is being circulated with this in mind. We urge you to assist us in this cause for the benefit of you, your families, America’s children, our society and future generations. You can e-mail me directly at email@example.com or contact our office at (315) 380-3420, personally at (315) 796-4000 or mail the Parenting Rights Institute; P.O. Box 8302; Utica, NY 13505. The opening and concluding segments were provided in our last two posts. The reform crusade is a longer one (12 year summary) which is sure to shock you today. It is reprinted below.
Report Title: Funding Request to end Discrimination and Criminalization of Fathers in Family Courts
Segment: Crusade for Reform and Justice
As a civil rights attorney, Dr. Koziol avoided divorce and family courts. But when he became a victim of both, it was natural to begin a crusade against sex discrimination practiced on fathers. It started innocently enough with public meetings and a plan of action patterned around other civil rights causes he had spearheaded. For example, in 1998, he was retained by a landowners group in upstate New York to fight a 250,000 acre land claim approved for the Oneida Indian Nation by the Supreme Court. That group was highly disorganized and grossly underfunded.
Accordingly, the strategy became multi-faceted insofar as nearly all political leaders were benefitting from the Oneida Turning Stone Casino with its new jobs, entertainment venues and world class resort. But a citizen protest recommended and directed by Leon became an instant success, yielding hundreds of vehicles to surround that casino, frustrating access and drawing national attention with a feature on 60 Minutes. This led to groups elsewhere retaining him for the same purpose regarding other claims. Thousands attended his speaking events, and after six years of fundraising, rallies, and lawsuits, the Supreme Court overturned its earlier decision.
In the case of father discrimination several years later, the same period of effort has yielded little success due to the overwhelming nature of opposition and an utter lack of funding. Nevertheless, Leon devised a similar strategy beginning with a planning session in the Plaza Hotel at Central Park in 2010, a parent convention the following year featuring a five time Super Bowl winner, and a Founding Fathers March in Washington D.C. It ended with a lobby initiative in Congress and the Justice Department where Leon had earlier met with lawyers and officials.
In June, 2012, a rally was held outside a federal appeals court in Manhattan during deliberations on Leon’s precedent seeking case, Parent v New York. Three years later, he was recruited to promote an awareness campaign at the Super Bowl in San Francisco. Then, on June 17, 2016, a doctor, dentist, lawyer and engineer, all victimized dads from Florida, California, New York and Virginia, joined in a Fathers Day eve news conference on the Supreme Court steps to support Leon’s filing for a writ to open our federal courts to victims of constitutional violations in family courts. He has vigorously pursued justice and overdue reform despite overwhelming odds.
Dr. Koziol’s personal ordeal has fatefully transformed the current crusade into a life commitment. It began as a candidate for Congress in 2006 when child support under parental agreement was being diverted by the ex-spouse to his adversary in the way of donations made by her divorce lawyer. In the years which followed, family court was exploited to harm his subsequent runs for public office, it impaired operation of his law practice and ultimately caused the loss of contact with his precious daughters, all in retaliation for his reports and reform efforts.
The divorce lawyer’s advice and intervention into a two year separation without incident incited controversy between cooperating parents. It was blamed entirely on a model father who was never been found to be unfit or the subject of any agency report. Three early years of litigation over the amount of child support resulted in a state supreme court judge ruling after trial that the figures contained in the parents’ original and modified separation agreements were just and proper under the Child Support Standards Act (Title IV-D of the Social Security Act).
Similarly, after another three years of custody litigation, a family judge restored Leon’s parenting time to the levels contained in those same agreements. However, during all six years of divorce, support and custody proceedings into the year 2012, Leon exposed vast misconduct not only on his case but among others across the country. With each public forum, news conference or legal challenge, a corresponding act of retaliation occurred among biased judges and ethics lawyers. It led to a record removal of 40 trial level jurists from his ever complicating family court matters.
For example, Leon moved for disqualification of his custody judge before trial in 2011 based on “political espionage” successfully litigated against that judge by his chief family court clerk in the federal civil rights case, Morin v Tormey, Hedges, et. al., 626 F.3d 40 (2nd Cir. 2010). Leon was highly criticized by opposing lawyers for that motion claiming that Judge Bryan Hedges had a reputation beyond reproach until he was removed permanently from the bench after admitting to sexual abuse of his handicapped, five year old niece, In re Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 (2013).
Leon also reported the misconduct of lawyers. Like the political donations, child support was being diverted for fees to effectively avenge and censor public criticisms. The divorce lawyer was reported for filing papers in the wrong court, making false charges of “hiding income,” offering a boiler plate decree with his own client guilty of cruel and inhumane treatment, and a protection order for publicizing entrusted information. The judge-appointed, child lawyer was reported for clear perjury. No action was taken against either while Leon was being pursued for “discrepancies,” set-ups and anonymous complaints eventually verified to come from lawyers.
Such reports triggered the first ethics prosecution against Leon on January 9, 2008 after more than two decades of unblemished practice. It was commenced the same day as arguments before an appeals judge who was also a member of the lawyer disciplinary court. Those arguments reiterated the misconduct of that divorce lawyer who, unknown at the time, happened to be a member of the prosecuting ethics committee appointed by the same court. Over time, the discreet mission became sadistically clear: to divert harm upon court reputation by defaming a credible whistle blower and his reform message through an abuse of judicial immunity and public office.
In 2010, Leon took a personal stand against the ongoing discrimination against fathers in these courts. He did so by withholding child support payments resulting in the first suspension of his law license. The event gained immediate front page news with the twist that no one is above the law replete with dead beat slurs and other defamatory matter. In continuing news reports and editorials, Leon countered with comparisons to Susan B. Anthony who refused to pay her fine for the crime of voting and Martin Luther King Jr. who refused to leave Birmingham jail until centuries of race discrimination was finally addressed. It expanded into a national reform effort.
When state courts refused to hear Leon’s constitutional challenges,  he resorted to federal court with a civil rights case attempted initially as a class action. While victimized parents across the country were anxious to join, funding was never included to maintain such a vast undertaking. It was therefore allowed to proceed by a federal judge under the fictitious name, John Parent, to signify all fathers similarly situated. To overcome a complex set of obstacles, it was necessary to name judges individually who were now substituting as parents or oppressors of free speech.
As a seasoned lawyer, litigant and parent at the time, Dr. Koziol was simply following “the law” when he sued so many individuals as opposed to the state as the principal defendant. This law was articulated by the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Young, 209 US 123 (1908) to overcome state immunity and Supreme Court of Virginia v Consumers Union, 446 US 719 (1980) to overcome judicial immunity. Neither case was cited in a 46 page opinion in Parent v New York, 786 F. Supp. 2d 516 (NDNY 2011). Instead the case was dismissed on a series of grounds which routinely protect judge and lawyer misconduct. It was affirmed by a federal appeals court on yet another ground of abstention in deference to state courts for the vindication of federal rights.
Such good faith deference proved to be highly misplaced as the persecution by state judges only elevated in retaliation. On Constitution Day, 2013, Dr. Koziol testified before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption along with federal prosecutor Preet Bharara and future U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch (footnote 2). He exposed the latest family judge for his finding of fictional college degrees in a scheme to elevate child support for punitive contempt and incarceration purposes. Within three months of that testimony, that same judge ended all contact with his critic’s daughters through gross violations of due process, such bizarre conditions as “prohibited alcohol related gestures” (wedding toast) and disregarded severe parental alienation.
This triggered a fourth civil rights action in 2014 essentially to prove that the preceding federal judges were wrong in their deference practices given the intervening events, appellate abstention which displaced any decision on the merits, and a 2013 Supreme Court opinion in Sprint v Jacob that unanimously condemned federal court abuses of abstention practices to dismiss valid cases. But the last judge, Gary Sharpe, was adverse from the outset causing a motion for his removal based on Sharpe’s prior removal from a case by the same federal appeals court in United States v Cossey, 632 F.3d 82 (2nd Cir. 2011). There, Judge Sharpe was sharply condemned for his finding of a human gene for decisions that would not be discovered “for another fifty years.” Because family genetics were at issue in the Koziol lawsuit, the motion was proper but denied anyway as a “Hail Mary pass,” resulting in punitive sanctions and even a conditional future filing order.
More than 100 decisions and orders were issued since Dr. Koziol filed his divorce in 2006 as an uncontested case. It was based on agreement and co-parenting. Nearly all those edicts came about through a process Leon has described as “Orchestrated Law” in his latest book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry. It is a tell-all literary work that documents his horrific ordeal with an education and reform objective. In short, an orchestrated decisional process features judges bent on achieving a predetermined outcome by citing only those facts and laws which enable it while ignoring the proverbial “elephant in the court room.”
In retaliation for that publication and editorials of 2017, judge #41 was assigned in 2018 to this endless divorce. Gerald Popeo is a Utica, New York city judge who was publicly censured in 2015 by the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct. He was never removed despite a hearing judge who found that he had made racist remarks to an African-American attorney, violent threats to litigants from the bench, and contempt sentences in violation of due process.
Gerald Popeo was assigned as an “Acting Family Judge.” He denied a disqualification motion supported by a sworn witness statement disclosing that only months earlier, citizen Popeo had approached Leon at a bar irate over the false belief that he was part of the witch hunt resulting in that censure. As judge, he denied the bar incident as he did the off-record racist remarks in the censure case. There was also a civil rights case history between the two including a black city official who attempted suicide after Popeo jailed him. All charges were dismissed by a jury.
The serial misconduct of Judge Popeo mandated removal. But a former state supreme court judge was his defense counsel, and he was let loose as a repeat offender might to harm more litigants. His assignment to “family” court was particularly alarming given his condescending arrogance, abuse of contempt power and violent temperament both on and off the bench. Leon’s crusade is a testament to his commitment for judicial reform but it also shows the extreme cruelties that will be inflicted to keep this family court gold mine intact. In the end, this conscientious crusade may save vulnerable parents in our family courts with their high percentage of self-representation.
 The early profound refusal was demonstrated in the decisional series, Koziol v Hawse-Koziol 60 AD3d 155 (4th Dept 2009). There a state appeals court affirmed the rulings of a lower court divorce judge who stated on the record that he would not entertain constitutional challenges to the federal and state Child Support Standards Acts (Title IV-D) or the related misconduct of lawyers and state agents. Hence the statutory prerequisite of notice to the state attorney general was not made pursuant to New York CPLR 1012. However, its companion requirement, Executive Law section 71 placed that duty in the hands of the presiding trial judge if the challenger failed to do so. That legal duty was never mentioned in the 2009 appellate series, hence facilitating the adverse outcome. A simple review of the decisional series and cited statutes shows without question that this high level state court was proclaiming that the people were required to follow our legislated laws but judges could disregard them for self-serving reasons. One year later, that same entire appeals court disqualified itself from all domestic and disciplinary matters then pending, only to return in 2013 with a vengeance after the Supreme Court refused to hear Leon’s Parent v New York case.
It must have been an alluring editorial in the Syracuse press because law firms are now running ads around the on-line version, commentary is growing by the minute, and a link at the bottom of the article takes the reader directly to our website at Parenting Rights Institute.
Founder and director, Dr. Leon Koziol, author of this editorial, continues to make headway with mainstream media to expose and reform corruption in our nation’s divorce and family courts. His column in the mainstream newspaper, Syracuse Post Standard, was published today, Friday, February 16, 2018 in its on-line version at Syracuse.com. The print version is expected this Sunday or Tuesday.
Entitled, Whistleblower: NY courts are bloated, inefficient and unaccountable. it can be viewed at: http://www.syracuse.com/opinion/index.ssf/2018/02/ny_courts_are_bloated_inefficient_unaccountable_your_letters.html. Or you can simply look it up at Syracuse.com, hit the three-line menu square on the upper left side, scroll down to “opinion” and it’s the third editorial down (as of 3 pm).
Given the rarity of public criticism directed at our judicial branch of government, and eye opening content of this publication, it’s a wonder it was published at all. But this one is getting a ton of supporting commentary, further proof that it is a subject which has been long suppressed. Indeed, one irate mother contributed what seemed to be a thousand word summary of her ordeal, and a father cited court corruption which might otherwise never make the news.
Another column with lesser 400 word content was published by the Watertown Daily Times on February 9, 2018. This mainstream newspaper near the Canadian border covers northern New York and the sprawling Camp Drum military base. That column can be viewed by typing Leon Koziol in the newspaper search bar. It is entitled, Tormey’s column hides judiciary’s troubles.
Finally, one day earlier, on February 8, 2018, in the central New York metropolitan area known as Utica-Rome, another column by Leon Koziol was featured in the form of a full page advertisement. This costly alternative was made necessary by the regional newspaper’s rejection of an editorial comparable in size to the Syracuse publication. Such censorship was overcome by a half page depiction of a nationwide epidemic entitled, Houston, we have a problem. And it’s in Congress, the liberal media and our courts. The complete rejected editorial was then published in the lower half of the same ad. You can look it up at Observer Dispatch (print) and OD.com (on-line) versions.
All three editorials were triggered by a commentary in the same newspapers authored by Fifth Judicial District Chief Judge James Tormey. This is the same judge who assigned some 40 trial judges to Leon Koziol’s originally uncontested divorce and was successfully sued by a chief family court clerk for $600,000 due to Tormey’s retaliation for her refusal to engage in “political espionage,” Morin v Tormey, 626 F.3d 40 (2nd Cir. 2010). And his co-defendant in that federal lawsuit was Leon Koziol’s custody judge, removed from his case, and later the family court altogether, upon admitting to sexual abuse of his handicapped, five year old niece, In re Bryan Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 (2013).
In the prior Judge Tormey column published in all three major newspapers of the Fifth Judicial District, a glowing report was given of divorce, family and other courts in connection with the Excellence Initiative sponsored by New York’s Chief Judge Janet DiFiore. It was therefore crucial for the public to receive a counter-point to this report, a shocking reality check even if a paid advertisement was required in one of them. The largest of these newspapers by far was the Syracuse Post Standard and today’s feature gave links to Leon Koziol’s cited reports and Parenting Rights Institute which he founded in 2010 and continues to direct today.
Please share this message and support our cause at http://www.leonkoziol.com and http://www.parentingrightsinstitute.com. You can also call our office at (315) 380-3420 or Dr. Leon Koziol directly at (315) 796-4000. Learn from an expert who sacrificed a lucrative career as a civil rights and trial attorney for over two decades to reform this corrupt family court system. Dr. Koziol’s recently published book, Satan’s Docket, continues to grow in purchases and popularity. Order your copy on line now. We hope to have more positive news for you moms, dads and court victims in coming days, so stay in touch.
By Dr. Leon R. Koziol
Parenting Rights Institute
Administrator’s Note: Because we received so much support for our last post entitled, Why are there so few judicial whistleblowers, we have decided to upgrade it here. This is now a highly valuable publication with solid proof behind the credibility of our professional work on behalf of countless victims of court corruption. It should be shared with fellow victims, media and potential investors. It is a crucial publication to benefit parents, families and future generations.
Why are there so few whistleblowers in the Judicial Branch of Government?
It’s a good question if you’ve ever stopped to think about it. Yet it is directed to a full one third of our government, the elusive judicial branch. A single judge can derail an entire act of Congress or a major agenda of the president. In the states, children can be permanently alienated from good parents without so much as an amber alert. Protracted litigation can cost its victims millions in lawyer fees and court costs. Yet no one seems to know who the abusers are and why they get away with this. Media rarely reports on them perhaps out of fear. Hence, corruption flourishes in our courts with little or no accountability.
That is because it is a self-regulated profession (lawyers) which controls the judicial branch and pretty much everything else that goes on in America in one way or another. Shouldn’t that then translate into a need for greater accountability? According to lawyer Stephen Kohn who wrote the manual on whistleblowers, those who expose corruption on the inside of government or corporations produce the greatest savings and benefits for the people.
In the judiciary, the most effective whistleblowers are lawyers, and among those, civil rights attorneys are most reliable when it comes to exposing corruption. Yet to date, there remains no protection for such individuals. A lawyer who exposes corruption can incur orchestrated ethics charges, in my case by exploiting an ex-secretary (finally convicted of felonies in 2016) to suspend my law licenses and harm capacities to support my children.
The public relies on judicial whistleblowers to apprehend judges such as Gerald Garson of Brooklyn or Thomas Spargo of Albany for soliciting bribes in custody and divorce cases. In Morin v Tormey, 626 F.3d 40 (a 2010 decision of a federal appeals court in Manhattan), a chief family court clerk ultimately recovered $600,000 in a judicial retaliation case due to her refusal to engage in “political espionage” directed by a chief judge and family judge. The first one, James Tormey of Syracuse, is still on the bench and the family judge, Bryan Hedges, was permanently removed three years later only because he was forced to admit to sexual abuse of his own handicapped, five year old niece.
How much of this corruption is never exposed? The answer is likely astounding for unsuspecting litigants who foolishly pay exorbitant fees for lawyers in cases which are already a “done deal.” And the reason there are so few judicial whistleblowers to expose this is the severe retaliation which can be expected. In my case, it was the loss of my children, law firm and basic liberties within months of my whistleblower testimony before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University in 2013.
The agenda for suppressing whistleblowers or any reform message that harms lawyer profits is to destroy their credibility, make them appear “crazy,” take away their means of sustenance and even incarcerate them, if necessary, on some made-up or minor allegation. Against me, that agenda took a long time, twelve years and counting, but I’m still standing. A look at my true accomplishments will show why my website, Leon Koziol.com is so highly monitored by ethics lawyers, judges, law enforcement and politicians.
They can take away pretty much anything but not my long term accomplishments. For victims of corruption, such a proven background should verify the credibility of my reform work. For example, I secured judgments in both federal and state courts to invalidate a billion dollar casino compact, the largest in the state, on constitutional grounds. I defeated giant law firms as a sole practitioner including one of the most prominent in the nation, Cravath, Swaine & Moore of Manhattan. Look it up at Oneida Indian Nation v Oneida County, 132 F.Supp. 2d 71 (NDNY 2000) and Peterman v Pataki, 2004 NY Slip Op 51092(U).
In the Oneida federal case, so concerned were they regarding a little guy from a small city that the opinion had me as co-counsel for a much larger Syracuse law firm, Bond, Schoeneck & King, even though that firm had nothing to do with the victorious client. Its president had no idea who John Dee was or why his firm was listed because it had never represented the citizen group or had any contact with it. But there it was, black and white, and you cannot retroactively amend all those case books worldwide to correct it.
I won my first appeal out of law school DeNigro v DeNigro, 543 NYS2d 777 (4th Dept 1989), an interstate divorce case, and secured a restraining order within months of passing the New York bar exam on a $30 million high school project. It caused the new Rome Free Academy upstate to be built at a better location in the Griffiss Technology Park. I won that opening decision alone against the highly influential law firm Hancock & Estabrook.
I won my first federal court trial, a sexual harassment case, in Currie v Kowalewski, 842 F. Supp. 57 (NDNY 1994). That case was front page news because the first decision was lost in Currie I (810 F. Supp. 31 (1993), but I had it reversed by unanimous decision of a federal appeals court in Manhattan to secure the final victory. The lower judge there was forced to reverse himself on the same trial record, a highly unusual feat which angered him, the same federal judge who dismissed my civil rights case in Parent v New York, 786 F. Supp. 2d 516 (NDNY 2011) after the targeting of my public criticisms of the judiciary began.
Although I could get a million dollar project restrained and billion dollar casino invalidated in federal and state courts, I could not get a family judge to order phone contact with my daughters after that. Prior to the targeting in cases involving many of the same judges, I secured a $333,000 jury verdict which was argued before a Supreme Court Justice (Sonia Sotomayor) when she was a member of the same federal appeals court in Manhattan, Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F. 3d 322 (2nd Cir. 2004)(settled at $220,000).
As former corporation counsel for that city, I sued its mayor to remove gag orders on city employees yielding another favorable jury verdict in Koziol v Hanna, 107 F. Supp. 2d 170 (NDNY 2000). I earned a perfect record of acquittals primarily for those falsely accused by employers. While I could go on, I served the people, my profession and my family without blemish and with distinction for nearly a quarter century. Suddenly when I began exposing corruption and promoting parental equality, nothing I could do was right. I have now been suspended from practice for eight years, one longer than the period for felony disbarments.
In stark contrast, lawyers in my judicial district were allowed to continue practicing law despite criminal convictions or serious ethical misconduct. Attorney Robert Sossen was convicted of tax evasion on some $2 million in unreported client income. A law partnership, Petrone and Petrone, mismanaged hundreds of thousands of dollars in client money. And if you can believe this, the lawyers engaged in the witch hunt against me were allowed to resign quietly after an inspector general discovered their falsified time sheets (Torncello, Zayas and Devane). These are the standard-bearers of lawyer ethics I previously reported as an “unethical ethics committee” charged with a duty of preventing overbilling practices.
It’s the foxes watching the chicken coup. That is what I concluded before the Moreland Commission after disclosing that my family judge upstate (Daniel King of Lewis County), used fabricated college degrees to elevate child support for punitive incarceration purposes. The New York Commission on Judicial Conduct failed to act on my complaints as it did to some 90% statewide. This prompted me to recommend closure of the judicial commission due to its window-dressing nature which only encouraged more corruption. Instead it was the Moreland Commission that was shut down after its work implicated top state leaders.
If you still do not believe that judicial whistleblowers are sadistically targeted by those with the highest duty of assuring justice, consider this: The first speakers before the Moreland Commission were lawyers who took aim at corruption in the first two branches of state government. I was one of the few focused on the third branch. Preet Bharara went on to fame as a top federal prosecutor and Loretta Lynch was elevated to United States Attorney General. I went the opposite direction, hounded to a degree of seeking human rights safety in Paris. It reads like a John Grisham novel and featured in my new book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry.
So when you view our court corruption site and public positions wondering how the before and after pictures can make sense, just read the cited cases here. Then you will know why there are so few judicial whistleblowers, why you have become so victimized. You will also recognize the value in the services we offer at www.parentingrightsinstitute.com.
Please share this crucial public message and support our cause financially. I am looking for major investors in my judicial watch organization, Parenting Rights Institute, focused on divorce and family courts. With proper funding, we can come to your courts and expose the corruption which is being ignored by our judicial conduct commissions. You can even call me personally at (315) 796-4000.
By Dr. Leon Koziol
Parenting Rights Institute
Why are there so few judicial whistleblowers? It’s a good question if you’ve ever stopped to think about it, directed to a full one third of our government, the elusive third branch. A single judge can derail an entire act of Congress or a major agenda of the president. In the states, children can be permanently alienated from good parents without so much as an amber alert. No one seems to know who these guys are, media rarely reports on them (perhaps out of fear), and yet corruption flourishes in our courts with little accountability.
That’s because it is a self-regulated profession (lawyers) which controls the judicial branch and pretty much everything else which goes on in America in one way or another. So shouldn’t that translate to a need for greater accountability? According to lawyer Stephen Kohn who wrote the manual on whistleblowers, those who expose corruption on the inside of government produce the greatest savings and benefits for the people.
In the judiciary, the most effective whistleblowers are lawyers, and among those, civil rights attorneys are most reliable when it comes to exposing corruption. Yet to date, there remains no protection for such individuals. A lawyer who exposes corruption can incur orchestrated ethics charges, in my case by exploiting an ex-secretary finally convicted of felonies in 2016.
The public relies on judicial whistleblowers to apprehend judges such as Gerald Garson of Brooklyn or Thomas Spargo of Albany for soliciting bribes in custody and divorce cases. In Morin v Tormey, 626 F.3d 40 (2nd Cir. 2010), a chief family court clerk recovered $600,000 in a federal civil rights case due to judicial retributions for her refusal to engage in “political espionage” directed by a chief judge and family judge who were her supervisors.
However this clerk was an employee and not a lawyer or litigant foreclosed from bringing such lawsuits due to judicial immunity. When it comes to those served by our courts, the rules of accountability change to their detriment. And that family judge, Bryan Hedges, also my custody judge, was permanently removed from the bench after admitting to sexual abuse of his handicapped, five year old niece, In re Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 (2013).
How much of these different forms of corruption is never exposed? The answer is likely astounding for unsuspecting litigants who foolishly pay exorbitant fees for lawyers in cases which are already a “done deal.” And the reason why there are so few judicial whistleblowers to expose this is due to the severe retributions which can be expected. In my case, it was the loss of my children, law office and basic liberties within months of my whistleblower testimony before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University in 2013.
The agenda for suppressing whistleblowers or any reform message that harms lawyer profits is to destroy their credibility, make them appear “crazy,” take away their means of sustenance, and incarcerate them if necessary on some made-up or minor allegation. But in my case that agenda took a long time, twelve years and counting, but I’m still standing. A look at my true accomplishments will show why this website, Leon Koziol.com is so highly monitored by ethics lawyers, judges, law enforcement and politicians, i.e. why they are targeting me so viciously.
They cannot take away my accomplishments, but for purposes of my followers and victims of court corruption, such credentials should verify the value of my reform work. For example, I secured judgments in both federal and state court to invalidate a billion dollar casino, the largest in the state, on constitutional grounds. I defeated giant law firms as a sole practitioner including one of the most prominent firms in the nation, Cravath, Swaine & Moore of Manhattan. Look it up for yourself at Oneida Indian Nation v Oneida County, 132 F.Supp. 2d 71 (NDNY 2000) and Peterman v Pataki, 2004 NY Slip Op 51092(U).
With respect to the federal case, so concerned were they regarding a little guy from a small city beating up on the high paid giants that the court opinion has me as co-counsel for a much larger law firm in Syracuse, Bond, Schoeneck & King even though that firm had nothing to do with the victorious client Upstate Concerned Citizens. Its president, Scott Peterman, had no idea who John Dee was or why the firm was listed because it never represented the organization or had any contact with it. But there it is, black and white, true story, and you cannot retroactively amend all those federal reporter texts worldwide to correct it.
I won my first appeal out of law school DeNigro v DeNigro, 543 NYS2d 777 (4th Dept 1989), an interstate divorce case, and secured a restraining order within months of passing the New York bar exam on a $30 million dollar high school project. It caused the new Rome Free Academy to be built at a better location in the Griffiss Technology Park. Again I won alone against Syracuse giant Hancock & Estabrook in 1987. I won my first federal court trial in a sexual harassment case in Currie v Kowalewski, 842 F. Supp. 57 (NDNY 1994)(Currie II).
That case was front page news because we lost the first decision in Currie I (810 F. Supp. 31 (1993) but I won the appeal in Manhattan by unanimous decision of a federal appeals court to secure the final victory. The trial judge was forced to reverse himself on the same trial record, a highly unusual feat which angered him, the same judge who much later dismissed my parenting rights case in Parent v New York, 786 F. Supp. 2d 516 (NDNY 2011). That loss came after my public criticisms of the judiciary began.
Although I could get million dollar projects restrained and billion dollar casinos invalidated in federal and state courts, I could not get a family judge to order phone contact with my daughters after that. Prior to the targeting in cases involving many of the same judges, I secured a $333,000.00 jury verdict which was argued before a Supreme Court Justice (Sonia Sotomayor) when she was a member of the federal appeals court in Manhattan, Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F. 3d 322 (2nd Cir. 2004)(ultimately settled at $220,000.00).
As corporation counsel for that city prior to that time, I successfully sued its mayor to remove gag orders on city employees resulting in another favorable jury verdict in federal court, Koziol v Hanna, 107 F. Supp. 2d 170 (NDNY 2000)(also won by unanimous decision on appeal). I earned a perfect record of acquittals in criminal cases primarily on behalf of those falsely accused by government employers. While I could go on and on, I served the people and my profession without blemish and with distinction for nearly a quarter century. Suddenly when I began exposing corruption and promoting parental equality, nothing I could do was right.
So when you read our site and public positions wondering how the before picture and the later picture can make sense, just read these cases. Then you will know why there are so few judicial whistleblowers. You will also recognize the value in the services we offer at http://www.parentingrightsinstitute.com. Today, a major national news organization requested court documents relating to my recently docketed cases in the Supreme Court and New York Appellate Division. A breaking news story may finally be forthcoming on this highly censored subject.
Get the full story in my newly published book, Satan’s Docket, available on the Parenting Rights Institute website. Please share this post and support our cause financially.
Dr. Leon R. Koziol
By Dr. Leon R. Koziol
Okay we’ve heard of all the crazy evaluations, forensic reports and even a “parent education” program ordered by judges in our nation’s divorce and family courts, but an exorcism? Was this really ordered by a judge in New York?
Well not quite. But pretty close when an affidavit was filed by a witness in my case requesting exactly that. It sought to have my ex-wife, Kelly Hawse-Koziol, submit to an exorcism for all the evil she was exhibiting in her unbridled agenda to have me replaced as a father by a childless millionaire.
It was also filed in response to all the crazy evaluations being ordered by a pair of feminist judges, and more recently, a trainee judge near the Canadian border, Daniel “Kangaroo” King. The concoctions, outright fabrications and shameless retaliation for my exposure of corruption in these courts made the exorcism request not so crazy when you really got down to it.
I mean, after all, if you can come up with a limitless supply of bizarre orders and psychiatric evaluations by legalized drug dealers, why not an exorcism especially when the proceedings defy logic and conscience? Beyond that, there was certainly enough evil among cases everywhere, and mine in particular, to warrant an exorcism.
Since the time of that affidavit, ethics lawyers engaged in the witch hunt against me were terminated for falsifying their times sheets (the same ones charged with preventing overbilling practices), my custody judge was removed from the bench after admitting to sexual abuse of his five year old, handicapped niece (Bryan Hedges), a chief family court clerk recovered $600,000 for being ordered by my chief administrative judge in Syracuse to conduct “political espionage,” (Morin v Tormey) and my ex-secretary, influenced to create ethics issues in my office, was finally sent to jail last year.
If that’s not Satan in the mix, then I don’t know what is. Now you can read all about it and much more in my early release book entitled: Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry. Some have thought the title to be a bit extreme. I was unsure until I met an author at the Whistleblower Summit this past July in Washington D.C. Bradley Birkenfeld spent 30 months in prison for exposing tax evasion schemes. On his release he recovered $104 million under the IRS whistleblower program. His book is titled, Lucifer’s Bank.
Judicial whistleblowers have no such protection. A New Hampshire attorney at the Summit was disbarred for this reason. Her recent book is titled, The Dark Side. So I guess I’m in good company even though I never was disbarred. I am still a member of the New York bar paying registration fees and left in an indefinite state of suspension (longer than a disbarment period) due to my public criticisms. I have never even been accused of any crime.
My book is being released early due to a family judge race in upstate New York (Oneida County) which is devoid of meaningful public discourse on the real issues facing moms, dads, children and victimized families in these courts. It is a phenomenal read. Ten years in the making and nine months in the research and writing phase, you will not want to miss this opportunity.
It is an unprecedented story about a judicial whistleblower forced to seek protection in Paris and the United Nations, a human rights odyssey spiced with intrigue, romance and humor to keep readers attentive to the greater problem. It has two parts, a macro half focused on a nationwide epidemic (Corruption) and a micro half (Carnage) which relates my personal ordeal as a result.
Perhaps most important to my followers is the information value which this book has. Think of it as a crash course in law school on how these courts really work, a “scared straight” program to keep you out of these lucrative tribunals, and it comes from an expert who spent more than 30 years litigating in both federal and state courts.
Get your book now by ordering it at www.parentingrightsinstitute.com. A PDF version can be downloaded immediately for a steal price of only $15. An autographed hard copy can be obtained for $30 which includes tax, shipping and handling. You can also send a $30 check or money order to my name at P.O. Box 8302; Utica, New York 13505. You should receive your copy in the mail within 10-15 business days.
Finally I am sponsoring an open house at my home at 1336 Graffenburg Road; New Hartford, New York where you can check out some of the scenes in my book and exchange war stories with me personally. It is set for this Sunday, October 8, 2017 between 3 and 8 pm.
And by the way, that exorcist thing? A New York judge did actually suggest that he might have to enter such an order. Unaware of the request by affidavit before an earlier disqualified family judge, this one suggested it in 2015 during a settlement conference before heading out to a noon time church service. Facetious at the time but true nevertheless for purposes of this book.
Kindly share this message for the greater good of our children, and dedicated moms and dads.
Dr. Leon R. Koziol, Director
Parenting Rights Institute
Dr. Leon R. Koziol
Okay, anyone can write a novel, right? It’s all made-up, fairyland stuff. I authored and published one myself in 2014. It’s called Voyage to Armageddon, and you can get a copy at Barnes and Noble Bookstores or order it on line at Amazon.
But what if a real story emerged, one that could actually happen to you. Welcome to my new literary work, years in the making and soon to be published. In fact, after releasing my first chapter on this site yesterday, I got a call and e-mail this morning from a publisher I did not solicit offering me a contract. An uncensored version is now available by ordering it on this site.
Yesterday I dedicated the first chapter to: “All Loving Dads on Fathers’ Day.” Today I am dedicating this chapter to all moms who love their children the same way. It is a segment of my fugitive ordeal in Paris when I sought international protection for parenting rights. You can also get the background and an excerpt which verifies the wide appeal of my book in two earlier posts of my Fathers’ Day Trilogy.
Today you get the PG-rated segment of Chapter Five entitled, Weaving A Tangled Web. It’s about a mom I met at an Irish Pub in Paris. The rest is the wild ride she gave me at the Bastille District, a night in Gay Paree I will never forget.
We pick up my story here at page 76:
During one such visit, I was treated to real entertainment after a wholesome meal. The singers, fiddles and jigs were straight out of Ireland, a short flight across the English Channel. It was also on this day that I met a single mom who was in the heat of a custody battle in the states. A group of estranged parents were exchanging multi-nation divorce scandals with me at the bar when this mom whittled it down to an exclusive conversation.
She wore a brown plaid skirt with white blouse, smiling in a manner wholly at odds with the war story she was conveying. Slender with long jet-black hair curled around one side of her shoulder, she could not have been much taller than five feet. All the trappings of an Irish lassie with an Asian origin, she was as cute and sexy as a woman could be. Seated on a stool to my right, she was quite nervous while relating her ordeal, crossing her legs and switching them regularly.
“So, Mr. big-shot New York lawyer, what do you know about French custody law? Can I pick your brain or is there going to be a fee for this?”
“You must’ve misunderstood my ordeal. I’m not a big-shot, I got shot big-time, more like an assassination by my own profession for exposing its corruption on parents like you.”
“Well I overheard you talking with the guys a little while ago about a billion dollar casino you shut down in New York.”
“You must’ve caught only part of that conversation too. I won the judgment that should have shut it down. I did what my surrounding landowner clients hired me to do, but like custody and divorce, money talks. The casino’s still there.”
“Well, then, you must still be good at what you do.”
“Depends how you look at it. I mean they flew in lawyers from Washington to argue against me on that casino case. One of the law firms was Cravath, Swaine and Moore. You should see their office building near Times Square. But even with my winning decision, they did an end-around with federal authority over Indian matters. Money usually wins out no matter the harm to gambling addicts or in our custody cases, the children. It’s all fueled by lawyer profits and federal funds.”
“So why not set up a law practice here in Paris?”
“I’m a bit intrigued by your questions. We barely know each other. I thought your custody case was in the United States. What do you care about French law and a practice for me in Paris?”
“Let’s just say my issues cross the borders. I may need to apply custody laws here but they’re not in my favor. I paid good money for the best lawyers to make sure my child was safe under my care. But I’m finding that my abusive ex is going to have him seized and returned to him.”
“Huh, that’s strange. From what I’ve read, France has a maternal preference in such matters. That seems to prevail even though it’s part of the European Union which stresses that both parents and their children have a right to a relationship. So I would think you’d be happy here. In the states, dads are 85% of parents paying child support. You should be good there too.”
“Well my case is unique. It goes far beyond basic custody laws.”
“It involves international law. That’s why when I heard you talking about national sovereignty with Sean and his friends, I figured you might be just the right guy for my case.”
“Again I think you misunderstood what we were talking about. I got off on the Native-American sovereignty issues associated with that Indian casino compact. They have their own custody norms. It gets very complicated. Nothing that could apply to you.”
“Maybe, maybe not. Do you have a business card? I’d like to give you my whole story on the phone, maybe over some early morning expresso if you don’t mind. Right now, it’s too noisy at this pub. That’s why I didn’t pick up on all of what you were saying.”
“Sure, no problem,” I replied while handing her my parent advocacy card, “but it’s all just bar talk. Don’t get too pumped about any of it.”
Over the years, I had been dealing with victims electronically for the most part. In this case, I found a custody warrior who had taken on much more than her parenting rival. Like me in New York, she had taken aim at corruption in the California divorce system, having written reports to various commissions, monitored court proceedings and organized rallies against domestic violence. In the end, she came up with essentially the same conclusions I did.
Her name was Linda, and she related an ordeal which could be considered my maternal counterpart. But there were puzzle pieces missing in all the competing bar talk. Occasionally melancholy, she betrayed great wit and broke out laughing at her own jokes. But when it came to court corruption, her mood got cold and sullen. A deep seated hatred for this custody system had found its way to our meeting, a potential release that might allow her to move on with life.
Despite being consumed by all her litigation, Linda managed to exude a feminine quality flavored by an eclectic mix of emotions. She was a tough gladiator, sensitive caretaker, an intellect, airhead, dictator and hopeless romantic all rolled up into one, lighting up at least ten human “disorders” on the DSM-5 manual from what I could tell. She impressed me as a rival to Debra Messing in her role as Kat in the acclaimed movie Wedding Date.
As our lively discourse progressed into the night, the music faded more and more from our attention span. I could sense that something special was developing between us. In a matter of only hours, our dialogue had converted total strangers into kindred spirits, fate-driven partners on a mission to save our offspring from common enemies thousands of miles apart.
The bar was getting louder as we were getting more intimate, so I invited Linda out for a stroll. I’d seen enough romantic couples arm-in-arm on these streets during my nightly returns to the hotel. Anxious to get a taste, it was a chance I took. To my delight, Linda happily accepted. Upon satisfying the lease payment for our extended stay, we exited Corcoran’s into the night time glitz of a lover’s side to Paris.
We headed back toward Place de la Bastille which was teeming with activity, from late diners seated outside various cafes to diverse tourists engaged in dialogue of many languages. You couldn’t help wondering how all those words meshed in one place without conflict or collision. We took photos of one another, then together at the urging of an elderly couple on an anniversary honeymoon. With their well wishes, we were suddenly on an impromptu honeymoon of our own.
One street off the northeast side of the plaza was quite inviting. We sauntered aimlessly along Rue de la Roquette, pausing from time to time to investigate the boutiques which caught Linda’s attention. Then we turned right onto Rue de Lappe as the passages narrowed. Here we found clubs galore and a hoard of night-goers which might intimidate most mature types, but to us it was an unexpected adventure, a trip back in time, a foray into our long-lost youth.
For no particular reason except its peculiar name, we boldly entered a night club known as Yellow Mad Monkey. Lots of energy inside, and there were actually large plants suspended from the ceiling to give this place a sort of jungle décor. Tarzan himself might swing down for a beer. There was a pair of chairs at a table that seemed available, maybe the only ones in this crowded venue, but the two couples already seated there appeared to have claimed title to them.
We must have looked out of place because, sensing our predicament, one of the guys invited us to join them. His name was Pierre from Quebec City, Canada, and he politely introduced us to his wife, Charlene, and acquaintances, Hank and Sheila. The latter couple across from us was from West Virginia and the foursome had met at the Louvre earlier in the week. None of us being locals, it was easy to join their conversation over tourist sites visited or yet to be explored.
“So what brings you two to Gay Paree?” asked our spontaneous host. He was a tall, stocky fellow in grey slacks and black silk shirt, middle aged with trim facial hair of Toby Keith variety.
“Oh we’re on our honeymoon, second marriage,” Linda replied with convincing character. She directed a celebratory smile toward each of our table mates and earned the intended reactions. I was last in line and first in shock but caught on quickly. We were going to have some fun with this, a role which that elderly couple assigned to us a short while ago and see where it all went.
“That’s so nice. Such a lovely couple, you guys, don’t you think Pierre?” Charlene was a shapely woman dressed in black pants and sky-blue top. A pearl necklace and jewelry on both hands signified their joint success. “I remember when we were on our honeymoon in Niagara Falls. So long ago, but it seems like yesterday. Where did all that time go?”
“I say we all get a shot to celebrate your new life together.” The offer came from Sheila, a long time girlfriend of Hank, the third man at our table. He was a burly guy dressed casually in jeans and a Mountaineers jersey evidently suffering from a sight defect because he could not seem to keep his eyes off Linda’s chest.
Sheila, on the other hand, came across as a fun-loving type, curvy figure and bleach blonde hair caught up in a bun. A red dress matched her rosy cheeks, and her arms were sufficiently intimidating to get Rambo accepting whatever offer she might make.
“Uh, sure, I guess, but I don’t do shots,” I interjected. “I’ll just substitute with a bottle of Bud. How about you, honey?” Linda was immediately ecstatic with my play-along, looking for max excitement the way a child explores a carnival, except this one had not been serving soda pop.
“Darling, I’ll have another vodka cranberry. We’ve had a long day, folks, and I can’t wait to get back to our room. You know how it is with wild sex, just can’t get enough fast enough. So the last thing I need is to pass out on my new hubby.”
Linda’s remark caused me to burst out with a laugh. So unexpected, it’s the way she delivered it, convincing yet perplexing. I guess you had to be there. I contained myself as quickly as I lost it, but our friends were already reacting with squint eyes and strange looks toward me and then each other. Linda was holding for now, but I was sure I could make her dam burst if I wanted to.
“Yeah like she passed out last night. And to think she was buck-naked when I took her off the elevator. Sweetie, you think you can make it to our suite tonight?”
“Not if you don’t get your hand off my thigh and back on the table where everyone can see it. Sex under the table is prohibited here, love, didn’t you see the sign at the entrance?”
It now appeared that our audience was unsure whether to be amused or disgusted by our x-rated, rapid-fire exchange. Charlene was cracking a Mona Lisa smile, Pierre looked stunned, Hank’s eyes were still glued to his prize but Sheila distinguished herself with an arousal at each remark.
“Yeah I saw that sign,” I replied. “And you’re going to see divorce papers if you pass out again.”
“Aw, such a jokester! See, Lee’s got this loaded gun when he doesn’t get his way. I love it when he shoots me dead at night, if you get my drift.” Linda added a few winks as if anyone needed it and pressed on. “Besides, we got company, honey, so behave.” Still sporting that trademark smile, she never missed a beat. This was getting more interesting as were the reactions.
“Alright, I’ll behave, but you owe me big time baby.”
“I love it when I owe you big time. When you’re big, I’m submissive. That’s the way it should be when a real man takes control.” Looking over her listeners with their disheveled appearances, Linda turned plaintive but only so long as necessary to keep her ruse in play.
“Sorry guys, we’ve been doing this foreplay thing all evening. It’s how we stay up all night taking care of business. How about you guys? Any action yet Charlene? Niagara Falls can’t be that far away?”
There was no reaction from Charlene. She just looked back at Linda as if she had just seen the monster in a horror flick. Linda was obviously getting quite loopy and carried away with her charade. In the process, she was taking us both over the falls here.
Concededly this was a foursome that was hard to read, square peg in a round hole, a classy reserved couple touring with Bonnie and Clyde. But give Linda credit, she was resilient. On the chance she offended anyone, she tried to make amends. Unfortunately, she overcompensated.
“I mean, we’re all here to have a romantic time together, aren’t we? I was just trying give you guys some inspiration the way we’ve been going at it. So’s it gonna be wild sex tonight or not?”
There was still no reaction from Pierre’s wife or anyone else for that matter until Sheila jumped in. It was anything but what we expected. In fact, it was much more than a game changer. Linda could never have imagined what her offer would elicit. It’s something we’ll never forget.
“Hey, whatever you two got going on, I wanna be a part of it. Did you hear that guys? Linda says she wants to share, like we all did last night. And what a night! Honey, you won’t crash on my watch, and as for your man, he ain’t seen nothing yet. You’re gonna love our toys. Let’s go now.”
Sheila’s counter-offer was shocking enough, but we were blown away when the other three at our table nodded approvingly. Linda and I were now their prey. It had to be an ambush. Neither of us could utter a word. Talk about censored speech. How were we going to get out of this jam?
They were all seriously serious, and for a moment I think Linda was feeling like she had just checked into the Hotel California. We stared in wonder, glanced at each another, our thoughts racing for a quick exit strategy. Then I took control.
“Sheila, you’re on.” I handed her a hotel business card with a room number scribbled on the back. “Bring your hottest nighty. And Hank, I got a cure for your eye problem, it’s called gasoline. We gotta go.”
I grabbed Linda by the hand and rushed her out of the club like mad monkees. That’s when her dam finally burst. Laughing hysterically, she stumbled alongside me down the sidewalk. It wasn’t long before we disappeared inconspicuously among the crowded streets.
When we got comfortable with our escape, Linda stopped, turned toward me and seized my elbows with each hand. She had that wild-eyed shock still plastered all over her face. It was as if she was suddenly back in high school after completing some kind of dare or sorority prank.
“I can’t believe what just happened,” she screamed, laughing to the point of tears. “Please tell me that didn’t just happen. Did they really think we were soliciting for a double manage-et-trois?”
“Not we, you! I never offered anything and you started it all. But I think they call it swingers.”
“Yeah like you weren’t enjoying it.”
“Actually I was, right up to the point where Bubba from the back woods was gonna have his way. I gotta say, Linda, you are crazy! I never met anyone quite like you.”
“Same here, I never met someone like me either.” She answered with a giggle as we locked our arms again and resumed our aimless stroll on the streets of Paris. “I really like you, Leon the lawyer. You got me out of a real jam there. I could use help like that in other areas. Can we get together tomorrow night? Drinks are on me.”
“I gotta hope you’re not too messed up right now. You downed a lot tonight and might forget this whole thing even happened in the morning. Are you sure you’re okay?”
“Absolutely, I’m getting good at this. A great stress reliever with all of what I’ve been going through. I got this lawyer right now who’s acting like a scared boy in front of my custody judge.”
“Well, then, it’s obvious you hired the wrong lawyer. Protecting a child is a man’s job, love.”
Linda quickly wrapped her arms around my head, inflicting a French kiss like I had never experienced before. “Wild sex could be the icing on our wedding cake tonight. Whatta ya say?”
“Tempting as that is, let me take a raincheck for now. It’s been a long day. Can I get you a cab, walk you home? I can’t just leave you unescorted in this condition.”
“Aw that’s so sweet. A real gentleman. Are you falling for me too, Lee? I sensed a bit of jealousy you know, back at that Monkee club. Gasoline? Seriously?” Linda was now slurring her words.
“The guy was a pervert, Lynn, he never said a word all night, just kept staring at your breasts. Talk about mad monkees in a jungle, I swear this one couldn’t formulate words. Besides, what’s a newlywed husband supposed to do? Good show by the way. You definitely know how to take a guy off-guard on a first date.”
“Well I gotta say, you rose to the occasion and delivered nicely too. I’m so glad we got married on our first date. Never heard of anyone having a wild ride like this.”
“Maybe I delivered, but not to get a star role in some Deliverance movie. What were you thinking? I had all I could do to keep up with your shenanigans. And how in the world did those two couples match up?”
“Yeah, I wondered the same thing. By the way, you didn’t really give your room card, did you?”
“I can’t believe you’d even ask. It was one of many cards I’ve been collecting for an extended stay here in Paris. My reservation at the current place is up next week, and the card I gave is from the last hotel I stayed at. The number on the back is the basement weight room.”
Linda laughed aloud, then stopped and faced me again, this time with a serious look. “Hey Lee, with what you just said, a great idea popped into my head.”
“Please, not another one. I can only handle one per century.”
“No, I’m serious, hear me out. I got this villa on the Riviera. I only come to Paris on business. I stay with relatives when I’m here. Why not visit me this weekend? Put off that reservation. I know you’ll love it down there.” She made her pitch enthusiastically, and frankly I fell for it, if not her. The proverbial tumbleweed, what did it matter where I went?
“Wow, that’s quite an offer. I’ve never been to the Riviera. Always wanted to go there though. This is all so spontaneous, but staying on the move may be just what the doctor ordered, especially after that call I got from Judge Paris.”
“Never mind, long story. Tell you what, the more I think about it, the more I like your idea. Let’s get together tomorrow night. We’ll meet at Corcoran’s and talk about this some more. If I can survive that forest fire you started at jungle bar, I can handle anything.”
“And I could use a guy like you to keep me out of fires like that. Sorry I got you into it, but you gotta admit, we had a riot getting out.”
“O, what a tangled web we weave when we first practice deceit.”
“What are you talking about, Lee?”
“Never mind again, another long story. It’s a quote from an old friend, a real old friend. Hey there’s a cab, let’s grab it.” We hopped into the back seat and away we went.
“Two stops, Rue de Clery at Poissonniere and Montmontre,” I announced.
“You sure you don’t want to make it one stop, Lee?”
“I’m a gentleman, remember? I may end up in Paris forever. So we got lots of time to get to know one another. If it’s going to happen, I want it to be special. And I think you’re real special, unfortunately very drunk too.”
“Alrighty then, bad for me, good for you.”
Linda eased us down into the seat and assumed a commanding position over me. Then she began to kiss, caress and stimulate me as if she had not had sex in a very long time. Come to think about it, neither had I.
To my amazement, an unexpected metamorphosis was occurring, a sweet transition from nightmare to fairy tale. We were two oppressed victims making our way to paradise without a care in the world. The cab driver lost sight of us in his rear view mirror and could only fantasize about our moans and maneuverings as he navigated to our destinations.
Eventually he came to a stop. Linda got herself together and exited while I monitored her walk toward some family home in this vicinity, the drop-off location she gave me for the cab driver. Barely onto the sidewalk, she turned, bent over and blew me a kiss. I smiled back. Then she sauntered off to points unknown, her now wrinkled blouse draping off one side of a displaced skirt and whatever was left of her hairstyle in utter disarray.
As the cab driver resumed his route toward my hotel, I reminisced about this extraordinary day. I did not know what to make of it, much less a woman who won my heart in so many ways. I may not have known much about my destiny, but I did know that I wanted more of Linda. Maybe it was that perfume, her special touch, the ambiance of Paris or a wild ride at the Bastille. Then again, maybe she was spinning a web I had never seen before.
Dr. Leon R. Koziol
Parenting Rights Institute