Follow by Email

Monday, April 29, 2013

At first glance, this Civil Matter looks like...

A cat fight between Denise-Marie McIntosh, part of the 1st wives club and Lori Ayotte-(Wilson)-McIntosh, et al (et al means and others) wife number 2, this couldn't be further from the truth in this matter. As such, you have to wonder why the Court chose those names when it was filed as Denise-Marie McIntosh v. State of NH DHHS/DCYF et al. 

This Case is about why the US-gets-an-f-in-child-welfare-and-an-a-in-military-spending, because it is against and about how the State of NH DHHS/DCYF fails federal and state CFSR's; a child/family therapist who lied to the Court's, specifically Dr. Susan Vonderheide, and the father, William P. McIntosh, who paid Dr. Vonderheide and lied to the Court's to gain custody and lead a young child to believe that his fit mother, willing only wanted to see him in supervised therapy. Visitation ultimately left to the discretion of William McIntosh and Vonderheide. 

As shown in this article by well known author, spokesperson and radio host, Dani Johnson, this type of behavior, people who feel abandon due to their own childhoods, slights etc. is an epidemic that destroys relationships. 

Now as a civil matter, the appeal 2012-0845 it shows the evidence based on fraud, and the Defendants replies affirm  the falsifications in this matter.  Fraud that was only uncovered by a determined mother, one who pursued a legal education.  This case is now in the New Hampshire Supreme Ct. because the Superior Ct. attempted to dismiss it based on their idea of when the Statute of Limitations should have tolled.  Yet, the historical findings of this Ct. base the statute of limitations on many different points.   Here the record shows, the defendant's do not dispute their guilt, instead, they claim the Mother/Plaintiff should have known about their illegal acts as they were doing it.  

Doesn't fraud in and of itself - mean to deceive? to conceal? If they meant to lie and conceal those lies then how would anyone know about it until they actually uncovered it? 

This matter only becomes public once it hits the Supreme Ct. which is where e-briefs will be updated in the next two - three years  due to "In September 2009, the court began to request that parties file an electronic copy of their brief in addition to the required paper copies."

Due to the fact that the NH Supreme Ct. is at least 2.5 years behind,  in updating their records it is important to post this case now:

2/21/13 Plaintiff's  Brief 

3/25/13 NH State Defendant's Brief  for State of NH, DHHS, Dept. Of Children, Youth and Families, Def. Roukey, Def. Geno, Def. Gubbins, and Def. Bishop.  

3/25/13 Def. Dr. Susan Vonderheides Brief  

4/15/13 Plaintiff's Reply Brief

This story as shown across the country will never be heard on TV in New Hampshire, because WMUR does not support the free press they support the people who fund them and as the only television station in the state they can certainly make sure that the heinous story's hidden by DCYF as shown in this Case stay hidden. You will find the same issues exist with the press here the Concord Monitor, Union Leader, and Telegraph have all glossed over the true stories and/or once covered failed to follow up; due to pressure from the old boys network.

However, the internet has broaden the knowledge base and parent's should not have to go to pre law school to find out and/or fight for their rights.  

In telling my story, because I  want to make sure what happened here never happens to another family.  If you need help with a NH RSA 169-C matter and/or you believe fraud could be involved in your case, do not hesitate to email for more information and do not let dcyf employees deter you for obtaining your rights.  Sometimes simply knowing where to look, can help you uncover their untrained employees and/or overzealous prosecutors before they damage your family. 

The entire story coming soon ...   for updates go to Legally Accessible 

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Injustice within N.H. and the United States ...

At first glance, this Civil Matter looks like...

"A cat fight between Denise-Marie McIntosh, part of the 1st wives club and Lori Ayotte-(Wilson)-McIntosh ...wife number 2"; in actuality it has very little to do with the way it is depicted and her affair, and everything to do with an American System that is corrupt and unaccountable to the public it is allegedly supposed to serve.   

This blog "Legally Accessible - Not so Much" will take you through the journey of one mother's plight against a system that is corrupt and evil to the core.

Uncovering the truth, is not just a quest for knowledge, it is a quest that cleared her name, exposed people who knowingly and maliciously meant to cause her and her son harm and who were and continue to be  empowered by a N.H., U.S. State Government Department called the Dept. of Children, Youth and Families; characters who are encouraged to act under the color of law.  

The destination was and continues to be, to let one little boy now becoming a young man, know, that no matter what, his mother's determination, resolve, and perseverance, in the face of adversity and discrimination was all because of her Love for her only Child.  

The results, are still unraveling but the journey has helped others, so that what happen here never happens again, but without the Justice systems ability to hold these people accountable, families will continue to be indiscriminately torn apart facing adverse circumstances that as non-attorney's untrained in the art of the law  and not empowered by knowing what their rights are; will continue to cripple the next generation.  

It is about leaving a trail, where none existed and accepting help in places where you never thought it would come from, while swallowing fear and using your voice to make a difference, a 1st amendment right in this country that the NH RSA 169-C seeks to suppress.  

Happily Ever After, it has its obstacles but making people aware of them is how they are overcome. 

Saturday, April 20, 2013

Bad Service and/or Fraud Beware of Dentists like Dr. Weener

No really that is the Doctors name and after you read the summary below, you will see that it fits. All I can say is Geeze, with the economy the way it is you would think providers like the ones below found at Landmark Dental

pic. from their site
Phuong an   
 Dr. Weener            Kriste a Dental Hygienist           assistant

here in Nashua, NH would know how to treat their customers/patients, instead of care, they give crass feedback from technical institute graduates like Kriste or Phuong, for complaining when their work is less than acceptable.  

Moreover, dental records obtained and reviewed, reveal what the insurance company did not catch.  These three individuals actually have done repeated work on the exact same teeth over a number of years without disclosure to the patient. The reason is that the quality of work is poor and has been on the decline to an aging doctor unable in or incapable of keeping up for the procedures and materials offered to patients today. 

Incredibly, a recent visit by the same former client shows that they actually fixed the wrong tooth without informing the patient until after  this woman "Donna" their treatment coordinator had her sign a bill for it, the tooth fixed was the tooth the insurance company shows was paid for the previous year, since dental insurance providers will not pay to replace fillings less than two years old, you would think they would want to correct their poor work.

pic. from their site

Actually, in this case they told the patient to come back to fix the one tooth she wanted done, and the work they did that day could be corrected then.  The patient was outraged, not only did they do a poor job, where you could see where they missed putting in the filing and didn't accurately match the color to the patients teeth;  they couldn't correct the poor job they did or fix the tooth she originally came in for, for another 6 weeks. 

Really, and they wonder why she was upset, and why their client list is shortening, inappropriate fillings that crack or do not match the patients teeth might be a clue.  

This recent article may wake other practitioners like this one to the fact that all around, lawsuits are more of an emotional issue than a financial one  and this one describing how communication with ones patients can reduce the potential for lawsuits.  Also, after reviewing the records and having to drive by several times (it's on a main road) a good clue that a doctor's reputation is faltering is the fact that there is hardly any vehicles besides the employees in the lot. 

Another, complaint on this doctor surrounds pulling children's teeth and charging for the loose tooth next to it that inadvertently fell out. $200 per tooth on a child 1st set, not impacted.  Hmmm

Check out doctors online, check other's complaints like the above and choose wisely, people do not take the time to write or have others post complaints unless they are exasperated and disgusted with something.  

Can you say sleaze ...