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 firstname.lastname@example.org 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