Montana Supreme Court removes Lake County district court judge from custody case – Daily Montanan

Shanna ManyWounds will be reunited with her baby boy after a Lake County District Court judge abruptly ordered him taken away from his mother in September.

In an order Tuesday, the Montana Supreme Court found that Judge Deborah Kim Christopher's decision was contrary to the best interests of the child, contrary to the advice of the court's expert witness, and “caused a gross injustice.”

The order, signed by five judges, described Christopher's decisions in the case as a “misapplication of the law” and a punishment of the mother that was not supported by the record. The judges also note that Christopher made his decision before hearing the mother's witnesses.

The plaintiffs' lawyers previously described the case as one of the most blatant miscarriages of justice they had ever seen in their roughly 25 years as lawyers, and the Supreme Court ruled in their favor.

The order invalidates Christopher's parenting plan and grants ManyWounds' emergency motion to vacate Christopher's custody case, an outcome that lawyers said would be rare and that the judges said was “an extraordinary remedy.”

“Judge Christopher created a parenting plan whose stated objectives were to punish ManyWounds for the court's belief that she had treated (father Jonathan Whyte) unfairly, to reward Whyte because she found him likable, and to deliberately harm (the child). “Exposing him to potential trauma was a misguided attempt to develop “the stress muscles” of a child who the court believed had been overprotected by his mother and grandmother,” the justices wrote.

At a hearing in September to resolve a few minor issues in a parenting plan, Christopher ordered the 5-year-old child to be immediately separated from his mother, who lives in Elmo, and with his father, who lives in Oregon to accommodate.

She did this despite any suggestion from a parent or any allegations of neglect or abuse.

Neither parent was represented by an attorney at this time. Spencer MacDonald and Lance Jasper, both of Missoula, agreed to represent ManyWounds after reading a transcript of the hearing. David Diacon of Lolo represents Whyte.

The parents were unsure when the child could get a passport – the father's family lives in Jamaica – and under what conditions he could vacation with the father in Oregon.

In their ruling, the justices vacated the district court's order and Christopher's parenting plan, which had been filed 43 days after the hearing and ManyWounds' petition to the Supreme Court, and reassigned the case to Judge Molly Owen of the same district.

The order states that Judge Christopher likely aggravated the situation between the parents by her cavalier decision to cut off contact between the child and his mother, who had been his primary caregiver up to that point. The father visited once a year for about four days.

“We do not allege that Whyte is an unfit parent or that he is undeserving of a strong parent-child relationship with (the child) with frequent and sustained contact with his son,” the justices wrote.

“We further do not blame Whyte if he was not fully prepared to assume custody of (the child), as this was an outcome that the parties could not have foreseen at the outset of the parenting plan hearing.”

“One of the more troubling aspects of Judge Christopher's decisions in this case is the damage likely done to the largely friendly co-parenting relationship that ManyWounds and Whyte had established. It is the sincere hope of this court that it will be able to repair this relationship and successfully co-parent the child in the future.”

In their order, the justices described the custody hearing as one in which the judge made a decision and later heard from the mother's witnesses; she ignored the testimony of her own expert; She wrongly blamed the mother for the father's failure to enforce his parenting rights; and she appeared to become increasingly upset and emotionally upset by the information she was hearing, but did not back down.

“Instead, she unfortunately made a decision that appears to have arisen from her desire to punish one parent and reward the other, at the expense of the well-being of the five-year-old child, and/or because of her sensitivity to the circumstances of this case “She was faced with custody and visitation issues related to her own children,” the judges wrote.

“None of the motivations are based on the requirements of the (Montana Code) and have resulted in misapplication of the law.

“Judge Christopher’s comments during the hearing demonstrate that her decision was informed by her personal feelings and perceptions of ManyWounds and Whyte. Judge Christopher repeatedly chided ManyWounds for not appreciating Whyte's parenting efforts, which she repeatedly described as a “gift.” He later stated, “I kind of like that guy” and opined that Whyte had created “the nicest (proposed) parenting plan I've ever seen.'”

Although Christopher was truly distressed, the justices wrote, neither parent behaved in a way that should reasonably have triggered that reaction. The justices also said the filing did not support the judge's allegations against ManyWounds, including that she thwarted contact between father and child.

At one point, the judge said, Christopher suggested that ManyWounds was responsible for the child's lack of relationship with the father's relatives in Jamaica because she did not take him to Jamaica to meet them. They also note that the judge believed that ManyWounds should sacrifice its own financial well-being in order to arrange transportation to the airport more conveniently for Whyte.

When determining a parenting plan, a court must use the standard of “best interests of the child,” and it is inappropriate to use such a plan to punish or discipline a parent, the order said.

But Christopher failed to consider the best interests of the child, which includes the wishes of the parents and the child, the order states.

“The court's decision, which currently prohibits (the child) from any contact with ManyWounds and places her in Whyte's sole custody for five years, does not support the best interests of a child who 'loves both parents,'” the order said.

The judges also said Christopher failed to consider or address possible trauma to the child and that she misrepresented her parenting plan. Christopher claims their ruling “turned the entire current upbringing on its head,” but the justices said the current plan allows the father to contact the child in Montana as often as he wanted.

“The parenting plan does not turn current parenting on its head; “It prohibits (the child) from having any contact with his primary caregiver until a yet-to-be-determined “therapist” decides otherwise and does not specify a time frame during which Whyte was required to engage an acceptable therapist,” the justices said.

The order also noted that Christopher appointed an expert of her choice, Lake County Superintendent Carolyn Hall, but then completely rejected Hall's statement that the child needed both parents in his parenting plan.

“While paying lip service to Hall’s testimony, the court has completely disregarded its content and ruled contrary to the opinions presented by Hall,” the justices wrote.

“The court asked Hall whether it would be emotional abuse if one parent prevented the child from seeing the other parent, and Hall replied that it was.

“However, this ruling prevents the child from seeing his mother, potentially for up to five years – an outcome that court testimony indicated was abusive.”

Hall also suggested that it would be “very important” and “less frightening” for ManyWounds to accompany the child to Oregon rather than have the father take him from Montana, but the judge recalled her own experiences in making the decision this case.

“I had to share my children with someone who abused them, and I didn't know how much… But I will tell you, as many times as I cried about the life I imposed on them, they told me, 'Mom, We would.” “We can't give up on how strong we are, even if we had to go through this again…”

“If you can build resilience, it doesn't come from the fun times, but from the opportunities where you don't have to strain or develop stress muscles, I call them.”

The judge told ManyWounds that the immediate transition would make him more independent and that “overprotection of children results in children being unable to care for themselves.” And unfortunately for me it was twice as high. Not only were they overprotected, they were also mistreated.

“So you're going to get a gift, I don't think you ever expected it.”

The judge made her decision despite testimony from ManyWounds and a pastor who said he had a relationship with her and the child, that the boy was sensitive and might need a few days to get used to the idea of ​​being in his care to leave mother.

The justices also said Judge Christopher's lack of consideration for the child's best interests was illustrated by the questions she failed to ask at the hearing. She wanted to know if the father had a car seat for the ride home, but it wasn't until she made the decision “for the first time” that she asked if anyone else lived in the house.

“At no time did she inquire about the security or stability of his residence, whether he had a bed for (the child), his work schedule, or any other details that would indicate that he was adequately prepared for immediate long-term accommodation “I sold custody of a five-year-old child without him apparently being willing to do so,” the judges said.

The justices said in remanding the case that the district court would return custody of the child to ManyWounds and the parents would return to their previous parenting plan until the newly appointed judge holds a hearing and issues a final parenting plan.

ManyWounds order

Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect the relationship between the pastor and ManyWounds as identified in the hearing transcript.