Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 30, 2023 - Blood Money

01:56:44

Blood Money Episode 59 - Connie Reguli is a Criminal, a Fraudster, and a Destroyer of Lives

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	♪♪♪
	Blood Money Episode 59 Connie Reguli is a criminal, a fraudster, and a destroyer of lies.
	Alright, welcome to the latest episode of Blood Money.
	Today we're going to do something a little different, akin to some of the episodes we've done before, like the episode 29 that we did recently.
	This particular episode, to be honest with you, I've been dreading doing this episode because of a multitude of reasons.
	Number one, this is about a friend of mine.
	His name is John David Cunningham.
	And the story of John David Cunningham is really a story of immense tragedy Of really what our country has become.
	John David Cunningham is a father of two lovely children.
	And like happens in many divorces, something that's not talked about in this country a lot, and it's unfortunate, is that men are often targeted in court.
	With false accusations.
	It's very easy to destroy a man's life with false accusations.
	And what happened with John David Cunningham is, frankly, he is facing 250 years in jail for such false accusations.
	And I will explain why they are false accusations.
	What one must know about the case of John David Cunningham is, frankly, there's a criminal involved.
	There's a criminal involved by the name of Connie Reguli.
	Connie Reguli Is John David's ex-mother-in-law.
	And really when you dissect this case, she's the person that's been driving the bus in terms of making sure to destroy John David's life with these false accusations.
	And I will explain why.
	Connie Reguli is somebody that within the family law community represents herself as essentially somebody that's fighting for the rights of parents as one of the good guys.
	She's got pictures out there with all the folks in the, you know, the family law community in terms of those that are fighting just the utter corruption of the family law world.
	And she represents herself as, you know, one of these individuals that's trying to do the right thing.
	Connie is an attorney from Tennessee.
	And when you research Connie, what you find out is that essentially she's a suspended attorney, really well versed in proceedings, working through DCS, CAC, basically sexual abuse cases, divorce cases, all that stuff.
	She's a classic family law attorney.
	But she has 14 Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility issues dating back to 2009, right?
	She has been known to be extremely abusive of the litigation process, extremely abusive of the litigation process.
	Suing judges, mayors, prosecutors, detectives, DCS, pretty much suing anybody that stands in her way.
	And for those that don't know how the family law world operates, it's extremely litigious.
	That's the whole point of it is to drag out these cases, take cases that should be resolved in a matter of weeks or months and drag them out because the more you drag it out, people, everybody makes money.
	And, you know, damn be the children in those situations because often times or most of the time the children are damaged because of these insane family law proceedings.
	But essentially she's a classic family law litigator and she knows how to play this game, right?
	She knows how to bully.
	She knows how to get her way with courts.
	And we'll see how she used some of these powers, how she used their power To make sure to destroy John David Cunningham's life, her former son-in-law, right?
	So in April 2022, Connie Regilly was convicted of two Class E felonies for harboring and aiding a client's child And then in another matter, she was found guilty in District Court of multiple counts of Rule 11 violations, including abuse of law, false allegations, fabricating misleading documents, harassing government officials, including a judge, right?
	That on its face shows that we are dealing with a criminal here, right?
	So now you have this criminal, Connie Reguli, which by the way, she's also facing aggravated perjury charges.
	So not only has she been already convicted of crimes, she's facing more crimes and the kind of crimes that are instrumental in committing fraud upon the court, especially the kind of fraud that she committed upon John David Cunningham in order to destroy John David Cunningham's life.
	By the way, one of the things I totally forgot to mention, I should have probably said this earlier on, is following this explanation I'm about to give, we actually have an interview with Elliot Cunningham, right?
	And so I'm actually going to, you know, edit this piece to introduce the fact that Elliot Cunningham's interview is a part of this.
	And if somebody knows this whole story that I'm about to say, they could fast forward right to the Elliot Cunningham interview.
	And get right to the story.
	But for the people that don't know this whole long story that I'm explaining right now, it's really worth watching this because you'll understand why, when you see the Elliot Cunningham interview, why this man, the father of John David Cunningham, is shattered.
	His heart is broken. He can't believe that Connie Regulli And other corrupt individuals were basically able to orchestrate the destruction of his family, the destruction of his rights as a grandfather, the rights of his wife as a grandmother, and really he hasn't seen his own grandchildren for a long time.
	And on top of it, his son is in jail facing 250 years in prison because of really what I will show you is the scumbag work of Connie Regilli, right?
	Getting back to this situation here, so basically the marriage of John David and his wife, whose name is Vicka, started to fall apart.
	There was evidence, and this is all documented, that there was a DOI arrest of Vicka, showing that she actually did have alcohol issue problems.
	She also was at one time found to abuse John David, actually physically abused him.
	So we have a ex-wife here who was his wife at the time that had a DUI and was found to have been abusive to her husband, physically abusive, right?
	So John David reaches a point where his marriage is falling apart.
	And just as his marriage is falling apart, and remember, he's been married for seven years now.
	He has two children, one of them that's six or seven years old, the daughter, who is the subject to these false accusations, right?
	Which I will get to in a second, right?
	So basically, the marriage starts falling apart.
	And the first thing that happens as the marriage is falling apart is that Vicka, John David's soon-to-be ex, Through Connie Regulli, her mother, who is also an attorney, and by the way, Connie Regulli is the, sorry, Vika is the adopted daughter of Connie Regulli.
	So, not blood relation, adopted daughter.
	So, as soon as John David's marriage with his wife Vika starts to fall apart, they start to accuse him of being sexually inappropriate with his daughter, right?
	And the first such accusation happens when Vicka goes to the next door neighbor and makes these accusations that, hey, you know, John David has been being sexually inappropriate with the daughter, right?
	And it's funny how these sort of things really happen not during a marriage.
	It always happens once A divorce starts to happen.
	Once a separation starts to happen, as the female in the relationship through clever attorneys, this case being her mother, tries to get pole position on custody by doing such false accusations.
	It's called the silver bullet of divorce.
	There's many books out there, including the respondent.
	Which is worth reading.
	It tells you the horrors of silver bullets divorce because usually silver bullet divorces result in a father losing custody of his children and frankly never seeing his children again, which is exactly what they tried to orchestrate here with John David, right?
	So I'm going to read this right here.
	Basically, the minute that John David and Vika started their relations started falling apart, Connie made 199 filings.
	This is 199 court filings in less than a year.
	Most of them aimed at making sure that John David doesn't use these kids, right?
	So basically, The thing that set off this falling apart of their marriage was firstly, Vicka had DUI. Vicka was physically abusing John David.
	And on top of it, one day John David comes home and sees that their Siberian Husky, the head is completely shaved.
	Vicka is completely drunk and obviously the marriage is falling apart at this point.
	But on this day, Vicka runs out of the house and makes a false accusation to the neighbor.
	Saying that John David has been sexually abusing the child or their child, right?
	Now, what's interesting about this false accusation is in the court, two and a half years later, The neighbor basically tells Vicka or tells on the stand that Vicka had lied about everything, lied about everything. That's a statement that she makes, meaning that those accusations in terms of John being sexually abusive to his child were not true.
	Nonetheless, what happens at this point is once these false accusations start being made against John, Connie tries to get her Psychotherapist involved.
	This woman named Janie Berryman, right?
	Now, before we get into Janie Berryman, what's important to know about Connie is that she also has a history of threatening to take away custody from her own children.
	For example, she told her daughter in 2015 that she would take their children away and leave her homeless.
	On top of it, basically, there's another daughter where Connie took, this is another sister in the family, another one of Connie's daughter, where Connie actually took custody of that child, of that mother's children, right? So she has a history of essentially taking custody away from parents and using her skill sets to achieve that, right?
	Now, excuse me, in the case of John David and Vika, she had actually made these accusations that she was going to take their children away, right?
	Now, lo and behold, once a divorce starts taking place, what happens is that...
	Connie starts trying to get her therapist involved to go and interview Anouk, the six-year-old daughter of John David Cunningham, the daughter that Vicka, the ex-wife of John David Cunningham, is accusing John David of having sexually inappropriate behavior with this six-year-old, right? Now, what's interesting is that the court does not allow Connie to bring her own person in, this Jane Berryman therapist.
	Nonetheless, she forces Jane Berryman into the situation, right?
	So there's a period where Jane Berryman is seeing this child and Jane Berryman in court actually made the statement that she could get a child to do anything by giving her a Tootsie Roll, right?
	To make her do anything.
	That was her statement, right? What happens in this process is that Jane Berryman, Connie's therapist, the one that's already made the claim that I could make a child do anything with a Tootsie Roll, seems like she has full control of the children and one wonders why A therapist would make that statement that they could make a child do anything by giving them a tootsie roll, right? So, throughout this whole part, the whole era of time, there has been no accusations made by anybody else other than Vika.
	Now, Jane Berryman, Connie's therapist, is seeing Anouk, the child, without the court allowing it, for one thing.
	And there's manipulation there.
	And again, this is a woman that says she can make a child do anything with a Tootsie Roll, right?
	So, they go through over a dozen visitations with the child.
	The child makes no disclosures about sexual abuse, right?
	Eventually, I think it was a 15th, 16th or 17th visitation.
	The child says that daddy was inappropriate with me and makes startling disclosures of rape and sexual abuse, right?
	Okay. Shocking.
	And believe me, if I believe that John David actually done all this, I'd be like, let him go burn in hell.
	Let him go burn in hell.
	Pedophiles need to be hung.
	They need to be just put out of society.
	That's what I think, right?
	I have no mercy for pedophiles, right?
	But I don't think there's a chance in hell John did this.
	And let me explain to you why.
	Because this child is visited on over a dozen occasions.
	Firstly, by an unauthorized individual, Janie Berman, and also DCS. After multiple meetings, the child makes this disclosure that she was raped and sexually abused by her father.
	When they ask her how many times, the child says millions of times, millions of times, okay?
	So when she was asked, why didn't she say, you know, this information during the other interviews, the child says, because you didn't ask her questions the right way.
	Okay, so later on, the child admits that what she said here is a lie.
	When the court case actually happens, I'm kind of cutting back and forth because you need to see this in light of what came after in order to better understand how this is all based upon fraud, right?
	So the child later on says, you know what?
	I lied about a lot of things.
	When the lawyer that's basically, this is the prosecution is trying to prod and find out what the child, what happened to the child.
	He puts up a big picture and he says, where did your, he says, did your dad touch you inappropriately?
	The child says, yes, the dad did touch me inappropriately.
	They asked the child, you know, what does that mean?
	Where did he touch you? And they have a picture of a child on the wall.
	They ask the child to point to the areas where the father touched her inappropriately, right?
	She says, the father touched me over here under her waist.
	Kind of like when you put your arms around the child right here.
	And she points to her knees.
	She doesn't point to her private parts.
	She doesn't point to her breasts.
	Okay? She makes it very clear.
	And she makes it also clear that in her mind, from what her mom's told her, Inappropriate basically means this and the knees, right?
	So the child doesn't even know what inappropriate means, okay?
	So that's the first kind of smoking gun, right?
	The second smoking gun is in this court session, the child admits that she lied at the same time.
	So not only is she admitting that there was no touching in the private parts, Okay, whereas the claims coming out from Connie's side, Connie Rigeli's side, is that this man raped his daughter on at least seven or eight occasions, stuck his penis inside a six year old, right?
	That would show a lot of damage, wouldn't it?
	Also, the child is examined.
	There's no proof of rape, okay?
	Now, three things.
	Those are three things. The child saying it never happened, the child showing what inappropriate means, and the child being tested, and there being no evidence of rape, okay?
	Now, I don't want to get grotesque, but we have to be logical here, right?
	If a child was raped by a grown man in his 30s, a six-year-old child, okay and according to what Connie and her clan of corrupt individuals and con artists Connie the con artist perfect right what they're trying to sell us and what they tried to sell to the court is that this grown men adult men Stuck his penis inside a child, a six-year-old child, at least seven or eight times.
	Yet when the child was examined, there was no evidence whatsoever of sexual abuse.
	The other crazy thing is that Vika, the mom, Of the child avoided the first examination, actually showed up.
	And when they weren't basically cow-toeing to her, like doing exactly what she said, she walked in there and said, you know, I'm the daughter of Kanye, you better know who I am, blah, blah, blah, throwing her weight around.
	And when she didn't like the way they were responding to her, which, you know, probably comes from An unbiased place, say, hey, we're not gonna kiss your ass lady, you're nothing special.
	She left with the child. So the first time that the child was supposed to get examined, she didn't do it, which is a crazy thing to do, by the way, because if your daughter's been raped, I mean, if I knew You know, had a daughter that was raped.
	I mean, you know, you're not going to take the child to be examined.
	So it's like the bullshit is on top of the bullshit.
	Now, what makes it even more bullshit, you know, that makes it clear cut that John David did did nothing of the kind.
	There was no rape.
	None of that stuff.
	Few little things. Number one.
	Connie intentionally avoids the trial that happened against John Cunningham.
	So she avoids going to the stent even though she was called to the stent and we'll get to that little tidbit a little bit later on in terms of her avoiding and also Vika avoiding getting on the stent because that's I think that's, you know, a game right there, because if they went out in the stand purging themselves in court, and we must remember that Connie's already got charged with aggravated perjury and facing trial.
	She's already known as a felon and a criminal.
	She's already lost her license.
	She's a criminal, basically. So for her to go on the stand and basically say bold-faced lies, knowing even though the judge called her is a tactic, not her not going is a tactic.
	Because you go on the stand, you put it on the court record that you are a known liar and a criminal, and he came to court and lied again to make sure this man landed in jail out of pure spite.
	I mean, your goose is pretty cooked, and it's already pretty cooked, as it is because she's a felon and facing criminal charges, but it's very hard to avoid a jail sentence at that time by repeating the same criminal behavior over and over and over again, right? Now, what's also the smoking gun, and I have to reference a very well-known, very well-respected forensic psychologist here named Dr.
	Frank Farnham. He's one of the most respected in the United Kingdom, right?
	He says that whenever therapy happens around court sessions as opposed to the natural organic progression of therapy, then he says that's clear-cut evidence that Such therapy, such therapy was only done for the sake of the court.
	What that means is, right?
	So this child, Anouk, goes through multiple sessions where she doesn't say anything about sexual abuse.
	Eventually, she says, hey, there's been a sexual abuse and in a whimsical way, she says millions of times.
	And by the time the court dates happen, she's already saying, oh, I lied.
	I said many lies.
	And then she points to where she thinks the father has been inappropriate.
	And like I said, it's under the waist.
	On the knees, right? So, obviously, she's not pointing at her private parts, clear that, like, she's basically saying that I lied and, you know, that daddy didn't touch me anywhere appropriate.
	And, in fact, she shows that her definition of inappropriate is different than what the true definition of inappropriate is, right?
	Another smoking gun to all of this, and remember, now we're at point five and six about why this is complete bullshit, but this is the strongest one, according to the words of forensic psychologist Frank Barnum, right?
	Where these kind of therapy sessions only happen around court dates and not around the progression of true mental issues, health issues, or whatever, right?
	So, Dr. Jane Berryman, after she gets a disclosure from the child that she has been, you know, essentially raped and sexually abused millions of times, Stops therapy.
	And that's what Dr.
	Frank Farnham is talking about when he's saying that there's certain, you know, Fridayland individuals that only do therapy around court sessions to help their case.
	Now imagine this, right?
	A child just told you that she was raped on multiple occasions.
	A six-year-old child, six-year-old child told you that she was raped on multiple occasions.
	Could you imagine the trauma of that child being physically raped by her father?
	What that child goes through?
	And you're telling me that Dr.
	Jane Berryman Decides to cease therapy the minute she gets that disclosure and funny enough the sessions only start again around court dates.
	Frank Farnham very eloquently has stated this is a smoking gun that these people are trying to commit fraud upon the court because if a child tells you they've been raped you don't cease therapy.
	The fact that you cease therapy and year of time passed by no therapy happened and then the court session is coming and now This Dr.
	Berryman starts visiting a child again.
	I mean, come on, you know?
	These are the kind of things that are smoking guns that in these kind of courts where they're attacking men, for some reason, this is very permissible, this kind of non due process nonsense.
	But, you know, was this Johnny Depp or somebody that, you know, had a lot of money, a lot of power and influence.
	I mean, this kind of stuff wouldn't fly.
	And it just shows you how these, you know, men that are deflensis are attacked.
	Now, what makes it more interesting is after these allegations of sexual abuse, The family court judge, who was named Judge Daryl Scarlett, actually said the man gets to see his children.
	And he wouldn't have said that if he thought that this man was a rapist.
	And what you see next after that judge says this man could see his children is the father and children reunited in a way where you see this daughter hug the father.
	And you're telling me that this is a father that raped this child?
	Hey, hey, hey, hey!
	Woo! Woo!
	Oh my god, your teeth baby.
	Oh buddy.
	Alright, let's go to the park.
	So the long and short of this unfortunate story is that through many tactics, including threatening to sue judges, including threatening to DCS, Connie was successful in forcing her therapist into the situation.
	even though her therapist, which is somebody that she's been friends with for a very long time, is clearly biased, clearly a friend of hers, clearly saying things like, I could convince a child to do anything with a tootsie roll, clearly hinting that this person is not operating in a proper fashion.
	In fact, the fact that she doesn't continue therapy After the child says, Daddy, rape me is, I mean, it's just despicable.
	Like it's despicable. This person should lose their license and really be put out to the pasture because like you, you know, either you believe that child was truly raped and you're an imbecile and really should lose your license or, you know, it's bullshit and that's why you didn't continue therapy.
	Dr. Jane Berryman, fraud.
	So here we go into essentially the court date.
	And like I said, in the court date, which was supposed to be essentially a much longer hearing than it ended up being, Connie and Vika, who were supposed to testify, never showed up.
	They were in complete, like, I mean, in my opinion, contempt of court.
	It's unfortunate that they weren't held in contempt.
	And to aggravate this situation even further, after all the evidence that I am talking about, where there's literally not a shred, not a shred of evidence, To indicate that this man raped this child.
	Nothing in the medical evidence.
	The child said she lied.
	The child admits that her definition of inappropriate is really not the legal definition of inappropriate.
	There's not a single piece of evidence.
	Not to mention the child doesn't continue in her therapy because either this Dr.
	Jane Berryman is a complete imbecile, which would disqualify her from this, or She doesn't believe that this child was raped because there's no two ways about it here.
	Okay? So even after all that stuff, what happens is that the trial is now coming to day five and Connie and Vicka refuse to show up.
	So John David says, you know, we need more time.
	I have five more witnesses to call.
	Five more witnesses. Okay?
	Not only does the judge And I will give you this judge's name, because in my humble opinion, this man is a corrupt scumbag.
	He did not give John David his due process.
	And unfortunately, there's a lot of corrupt scumbag judges out there.
	So Judge Tidwell, basically, when John David is like, I have five more witnesses, and we need more time, and not to mention Connie on Thursday didn't show up to the court with Vicka like she was supposed to for her to testify.
	Doesn't show up on Friday.
	Nonetheless, this judge where there's more witnesses to be had, Very essential that Connie, who's the lead attorney that's been driving the bus on destroying John David's life.
	Very essential that he be called to the stand.
	She be called to the stand.
	What does the judge do? Says essentially this trial is over.
	This trial is over on Friday.
	Doesn't give John David enough time to make his case.
	Okay? Nonetheless, there's still a lot of evidence to show that there is no evidence.
	What happens next?
	Well, somewhere within all of this, the district attorney tells the judge that I have no case.
	My case is falling apart because they realize they have no evidence.
	The Judge Tidwell, Judge Tidwell, forces the case to go on.
	Not only does it force the case to go on, when it comes to John David's witnesses, when it comes to John David calling Vicka and Connie to stand, he cuts the trial short.
	John David thinks that they're going to have at least eight to ten days.
	Judge Tidwell calls it short on the fifth day and says this trial ends today.
	Not giving John David enough time to do the obvious.
	Get his five witnesses. Get Connie and Vic on the stand.
	Especially, I mean, Connie and Vic are clearly avoiding the stand.
	They know they have to be in court.
	But this Judge Tildwell, I mean, He's literally playing for the other team.
	When he's not giving John David the time that he needs to call his five witnesses, on top of the fact that Connie and Vicka have been wasting the court's time by not showing up, the right thing to do for the man to see is due process to give him those extra dates.
	But he doesn't, and essentially they force a judgment, and John David is found guilty.
	Of raping his own daughter and is now facing 250 years in jail.
	On April 12th is his sentencing.
	And this is literally no piece of evidence.
	There's no piece of evidence. If anything, one has to question this child, not having made any disclosures for a very long period of time, being in the custody in hands of Connie and Vicka, being in the custody in hands of Jane Berryman, all Connie's people, all of them surrounding this child, for years on end, the child doesn't make any disclosures.
	And then eventually, she makes a disclosure.
	After a therapist has said, I could give a tootsie roll to a child and I can make that child do anything.
	You know, it's unbelievable that John David is even facing this.
	You know, it's unbelievable that this is even possible to do it, to do this sort of thing.
	This district attorney from Tennessee and Judge Tildwell and Connie Regulli All operating on the same team because they did not give the due process.
	They did not give John his time.
	If anything, Judge Tildwell, if he wasn't working with Connie, should have held her in contempt for not showing up to give testimony.
	How we could end the trial without the key testimony of the person that's been driving the bus on the destruction of John David's life is beyond me.
	But that's unfortunately how This system now works.
	This is a full on attack on good men like John David Cunningham and John David Cunningham is innocent of all charges.
	He and his daughter are victims of what is called the silver bullet in divorce, which is basically making false accusations.
	The easiest thing to do doesn't mean doesn't even you don't even need evidence, right?
	The most tragic part of this, the most tragic part of this is what's happening to Anu.
	Because Anu clearly loves her father.
	Anu clearly doesn't know the fraud that has been perpetrated upon her.
	And, you know, what we must remember is this whole anti-male movement has been fueled by this third wave feminism.
	And so I asked those third wave feminists, right?
	How is feminism won when this child...
	Is going to know in the future that she was manipulated into destroying her father's life.
	How is this child to benefit?
	How is this female child to benefit from third wave feminism when her life as of six years old has been destroyed because she was manipulated into destroying her own father's life.
	Okay? That's the thing about these, frankly, idiotic, idiotic mindsets, right?
	Because it's great on the surface, but when you go and you, you know, rip those layers of the onion apart, you know, every woman is capable of having a man child, of having a boy child, okay?
	Every child Could fall victim and have their lives destroyed because of this legal abuse.
	Okay? So for those third wave feminists out there that unless you decide you don't want, you're going to abort any boy child.
	Could you imagine if John David was your boy facing 250 years in jail, how you would feel right how you would feel and so when you watch this interview with Elliot Cunningham the father of John David and you see his pain you see the hell he's been through I hope you have a little bit of sympathy because this war against men is destroying this country this war against men is destroying the children of this nation Female and male children of this nation.
	This toxic war against masculinity is toxifying both our female and male children.
	Okay, so enjoy this episode.
	And please don't stay silent.
	Don't stay silent when it comes to these issues.
	Only when it comes home will you feel the deep suffering and pain.
	Don't wait for that moment.
	Fight this battle now.
	You know, help Elliot Cunningham, help John David Cunningham beat this immense injustice.
	Tell your neighbors, tell the people around you what's going on.
	Wake up, people, because the death of masculinity is the death of the United States of America.
	Enjoy this interview, and I hope to see you on the next episode of Blood Money.
	Thank you very much. All right, so I'm going to give a little summary of the story you're about to say, Elliot, because this is a topic that's close to my heart and something that I've been following.
	But in essence, I feel like a good man was...
	Pretty much given a death sentence because of the lies of a criminal lawyer named Connie Reguli.
	I know that's a bold statement, but please, you know, tell me what happened.
	Okay, well, my son, John David Cunningham, about 10 years ago, married Connie Reguli's adopted daughter, Vicka.
	And they had immediately had a little girl and then a year, 13 months later, had a little boy and they've always had kind of a little bit of a rocky and tumultuous relationship.
	You know, my son has done the best he can to take care of his family and provide for his family.
	He had a good job working for a Medicare and Medicaid provider called CGS. And, you know, they had tried to do a lot.
	We did a lot to try to support them.
	There have been, ironically, some spousal Abuse issues where Avika had been arrested for abuse of my son.
	And so he was... So this is a documented instance of abuse where she actually physically assaulted your son.
	And was arrested. And was arrested, yes.
	And so, you know, I say that because I think it's important to know that, you know, Connie Regulee is a family court attorney.
	She's been doing it for a long, long time.
	You know, my son has done everything he can to make sure he's, you know, taking care of things, taking care of his family, certainly walking within the lines and the rules of behavior in a You know, in a family, in a marriage, particularly because, you know, Connie was who she was.
	I've actually referred clients to Connie.
	Connie's been in our home. We've spent Easter's and Thanksgiving's together as a family at her mother's home.
	But she was never happy with the way my son, she couldn't control my son.
	She always tried to control her daughter.
	She had previously intervened in the divorce of the twin sister.
	And she intervened in that divorce.
	It was a bad divorce. She ended up taking custody of the child in that divorce and had previously sent messages to her daughter and also my son saying that, you know, if they didn't get their act together and do what she wanted, then she was going to take custody of the children and leave them homeless,
	you know? So that's kind of a backdrop that, you know, he knew where he was and So apparently in May 29th of 2019, my son came home, found Vicka had been drinking.
	He worked from 5 to 2 p.m.
	in the afternoon so he could be with the family.
	He got home and Vicka had shaved their Siberian Husky ball.
	And the house was a mess.
	The kids were bouncing off the walls and, you know, And within a couple hours later, she said, well, why don't you go to the store and, you know, get us some groceries.
	And there was a way to get bath bombs for her and the children.
	And so we got home.
	My granddaughter at the time, she said, hey, Daddy, can we take a bath bomb together?
	And he said, no, honey, we're not going to do that.
	But Vicka, like, apparently lost it and just blew up and said, I can't believe this.
	And there was, you know, And he said, well, you need to go, you know, you need to go get your act together.
	And if you need to, you need to go to your mom's.
	And she left and she went to the neighbors and then, you know, ultimately went to her mom's and she was staying at her mom's and she was in communication with my son and Connie was in communication with me and everybody was going to try to get them back together.
	And, you know, all this stuff.
	Well, then, all of a sudden, a week later, he calls me and he says, Hey, Dad, I've gotten a note on my door from DCS. And they want to talk to me.
	And I said, well, what do you think it's about?
	And they go, well, I don't know.
	Vicka wouldn't, you know, take our son to the doctor to get his teeth done.
	Maybe somebody or Vicka or somebody's upset about that.
	I don't know. I don't know what it is.
	So I went by Connie's office and I said, hey, Connie, what's going on?
	And she goes, oh, well, apparently somebody has turned in a sex abuse violation against John David and Vicka.
	But I don't want you to worry about it because I'm taking care of it.
	I know how all this works.
	I know DCS and we knew that she knew that.
	And she said, you know, so I filed a reply and she gave me the reply that she had filed on, you know, in regards to this to DCS. She also said, and by the way, I'm suing DCS because of the way they're doing things,
	and they've done things wrong, and they've done this, and they've done that, and I'm trying to get it set up so Janie Berman can do the forensics interview to satisfy DCS, but they're not letting that happen.
	And she gives me this big document, which is basically a lawsuit against DCS, And so I sent all this to my son, John David, and I said, hey, this is what's going on.
	And he said, well, I'm completely unaware and shocked that any of that would be happening.
	And he, you know, he was then told by Vicka, his wife at the time, that he wasn't to talk to DCS, her mom was taking care of everything, and that it was all going to be okay.
	They continued to see each other as a family and do things all the way into July.
	And then all of a sudden he gets served in divorce proceedings in July.
	They cut off all communication and he's aware that there was supposed to be a DCS inquiry.
	I don't know about DCS. All I know is apparently within two weeks of some Allegation that there's supposed to be some interview and he finds out that they have been blocking the interviews, refusing to do the interviews.
	I think he finds out from Vicka that the- So let me, sorry, let me ask you.
	So does it, I mean, basically, is it that Connie was basically pretending to be wanting to help John and then Pretty much getting divorce papers ready behind the scenes.
	Is that what happened? Well, that appeared to be the appearance of what was happening.
	I don't know what was going on in her mind, but he ended up subsequently finding out that this divorce had been filed and then they filed a TRO, ex parte TRO against him to block him from having any access to his children.
	So hang on.
	That's an important point because she had told you guys that, don't worry, I'm going to take care of it.
	Basically offering legal representation, but at the same time, kind of basically being almost a double agent type that's really setting up you guys for a fail.
	I mean, that's what it seems like, which is...
	I mean, wouldn't that be misconduct on her part where she's trying to pretend that she's going to take care of it all and then at the same time she's basically setting up John?
	I mean, is that what happened?
	Am I understanding it correctly?
	Yeah, that's what appeared to have happened.
	And then, so, you know, John David gets his divorce proceedings and then he goes and he hires an attorney.
	He says, I don't want a contentious divorce if Vicka wants to leave.
	I don't want to get divorced, but if she wants to leave, you know, then he does that.
	And then he finds out that, because Connie not only sued DCS, she sued the family court judge, she sued the family court attorney, she sued everybody.
	And then and apparently in that lawsuit, it was for a million dollars against DCS and then...
	For what? A million dollars for making these allegations against John?
	I don't know what the grounds of the million dollars was for.
	Allegedly it was impropriety by DCS and the family court and everybody else it named in the lawsuit in some form of impropriety or misconduct or something because all this time he doesn't know what's He's not aware of any allegations.
	He's not aware of any specifics other than what he's found out that there was some sexual abuse allegations and that Vicka had said that the neighbor had apparently You know reported something and but Vicki didn't know what it was and he didn't know what it was and don't worry you know I mean literally Facebook messages don't worry baby it's gonna be okay but subsequently found out that apparently Vicki had gone next door and told the next-door neighbor all sorts of heinous
	allegations of sexual abuse going on for like five years against his daughter and which was all news to him and What was the allegation, by the way?
	Could you please go over the allegations?
	Well, the allegations at the time were, you know, that he was putting his privates and her privates and, you know, sexually abusing her and things like this.
	They were rather, they were semi-specific, but not, you know, just kind of allegations that the neighbor says this is what Vicka told her.
	But ironically, Vicka later in deposition said, well, I never told the neighbor that.
	In her own depositions, Vicka says, I never told the neighbor that, you know, I don't know what her reasons for the neighbor doing this.
	But anyway, the thing went on and they end up avoiding and refusing to comply with the DCS inquiry about any of these allegations.
	So nobody knew at the time, nobody knew.
	And even John David didn't know what had been alleged.
	He didn't know what the neighbor had said.
	He didn't know anything other than there were sexual abuse allegations.
	And he was being told it's all going to work out.
	Well, that ended up creating a cloud because of this TRO and refusal to comply with the DCS interview.
	Who was refusing to comply with the DCS interview?
	Vicka and her mother, Connie Reguli, who Vicka says was her mother, was her attorney at the time.
	Now, DCS wants to interview them about the sexual abuse allegations.
	They want to interview the daughter.
	And why would they want to refuse to be interviewed when there's allegations that their daughter is being raped?
	I have no idea.
	I mean, I would think you'd want to Determine that immediately, but they ended up not only...
	Connie's lawsuit, she was trying to establish her professional psychologist colleague that she uses in her proceedings as the official court-ordered forensics interviewer instead of DCS. And DCS not only said, no, you can't do that, they actually notified...
	Dr. Jamie Behrman that she was not to talk to the child prior to doing any DCS interview and inquiry.
	And Jamie Behrman allegedly backed off and said, okay, but this goes on.
	And so what ends up happening is for four months, they refused to comply with the request for a DCS interview to talk to the child about these allegations.
	And this goes on.
	They're not allowing the child to talk either about these allegations.
	That's correct. That's correct.
	I mean, the whole thing seems very odd.
	Why are they blocking it so much when the allegations are so serious?
	Well, at the time, my son didn't know the full extent of anything.
	And he's trying to get his attorney, I mean, the whole time he's trying to get his attorney saying, look, I just want to see my children.
	I'm being blocked from seeing my children.
	And this is going on day after day, week after week for four months.
	And now we're into, you know, August.
	Then we're into September.
	He's still being blocked.
	The family court is saying, well, gee, has this, because he's going to family court saying, hey, you know, what's the status of this?
	And the answer he gets back is, well, DCS still hasn't conducted its interviews, so we're holding off and waiting.
	It creates a cloud to keep him from seeing his children until this interview is done.
	Well, the interview is not happening.
	It continues to not happen.
	He ultimately finds out that they defied two court orders by the family court for the daughter to be interviewed.
	And then they didn't do the interview until finally in November, the middle of November.
	And as soon as they conduct the interview, my son has a conversation with DCS. He's been trying to, you know, provide whatever information to DCS they need because he wants to get this cloud, you know, behind him and move on.
	And he finally finds out middle of November that the DCS interview finally happened.
	That there was no disclosures by his daughter.
	The DCS had closed the matter and they told him there's no reason why you can't see your children.
	So this is the part that, just because I know a little bit about this case, I want to point something out to the viewer, right?
	And tell me if I'm incorrect or correct me if I'm saying this wrong.
	But it seems as though Connie really wanted her psychologist involved in this case.
	And DCS didn't want that to happen.
	But nonetheless, Connie forced her individual into this case.
	Now you have the DCS findings, which are that nothing really happened.
	There was no sexual abuse.
	The child didn't make any disclosures.
	But nonetheless, Connie's psychologist somehow produced the child seeing that.
	Is that correct? So, yeah, it's very complicated and because what happened was in the middle of November, DCS dropped everything.
	Well, immediately on DCS closing its case, Connie filed ex parte TRO in family court against my son again to block him from seeing his children.
	He shows up in family court and lo and behold The judge, you know, says he denies the ex parte TRO and says, no, I'm not going to authorize that.
	This is now a different judge.
	And he, you know, all this stuff.
	And he then says, you know, you guys need to work this out.
	And they agree to a parenting plan.
	And, you know, so all of a sudden there's an agreed parenting plan, and Connie and Vicka invite my son to go to my granddaughter's birthday at Laser Quest.
	And that's what generated the TRO, because it was going to be a Chuck E. Cheese.
	They moved it to Laser Quest, which is an in-the-dark place.
	And they tried to go to court, file a TRO, saying something happened in the dark at Laser Quest.
	But Connie also invited us and my son to go to dinner that evening at the Hard Rock Cafe next door.
	And so all of a sudden TRO flops up because of this, you know, laser quest alleged something.
	But that ends up being thrown out by the judge.
	Now he says, you need to work this out.
	And then they agree to a parenting plan.
	And so all of a sudden he's backstage.
	Can I ask you something?
	Do you feel as though the whole laser quest thing and change of locations was an intentional kind of setup to make more false allegations?
	My son felt it was because apparently that's what they went into family court with and tried to say you know something happened there and the judge was like well this is this doesn't add up and he said you know work this out and in that in that court date that day they came up and agreed to a A pendente light parenting plan because they weren't divorced and it was still pending and all of a sudden he's back seeing his children again starting the end of November and was
	on a progressive path, you know, that happens with these pendente lights of supervised to supervised overnights to unsupervised to return to normal relationships over the Subsequent months and so that's where we are in the timeline where all of a sudden they're back seeing each other again as a family and the kids are coming over.
	Vicka's dropping them off at the house.
	Do you mind if I pause you right there?
	Just going back to the laser location, right?
	So was there any evidence made for the allegations that I guess Connie and Vicka was trying to make allegations against your son John about things that happened at that laser tag location?
	Something like something happened, you know?
	I don't know. Was there any evidence?
	Was there any disclosures by the child?
	No. It was just an accusation by them?
	Yes. Now, because what I'm trying to get at is it seems as though every time John's trying to see his children, false accusations are constantly being made.
	Is that accurate? That's what it appears to be, yes.
	And every time they make false allegations, John can't see his children because now findings have to be made based upon those false accusations or...
	Yes. Yeah. But in this particular case, relative to LaserQuest, it was just like, you know, dismissed by the judge.
	He refused to grant the TRO. And in that same hearing, they came in and did an agreed order to a pendente-like parenting plan.
	So it was kind of ironic. They went in for a TRO and ended up walking out with an agreed parenting plan.
	So it sounds like you guys had a pretty decent family court judge, which is not usually...
	The family court judge in my son's case, so Connie, in the original thing, sued Donna Davenport, Judge Donna Davenport, so she was off the case.
	It ended up moving over to Darrell Scarlett.
	This is all in Rutherford County.
	Darrell Scarlett has been a pretty good judge for my son.
	I've heard a lot of horrors about family court, and besides the protraction, which I don't really necessarily You know, blame him.
	Besides the protraction, Judge Scarlett, and you'll find out more about that as we go on, Judge Scarlett's been a fairly good judge on behalf of my son and his family.
	Around this same time that these allegations come out about John and via John's ex to the next door neighbor about John being sexually abusive to his children, wasn't there some kind of recording having to do with Connie's son being abusive to John's children?
	Well, that's something that occurred later because what ended up happening was, and John David never found out what had been conveyed to the, he never found out what was conveyed to the neighbor and what was in the neighbor's report and all that stuff until a year and a half later.
	You know, so he never knew about any of that.
	He starts seeing the children again.
	And, you know, I ended up getting a message from Vicka kind of in the December timeframe that says, John David, you know, he needs to be, you know, mind his P's and Q's or whatever.
	And he... December 21?
	Like in the middle of December when these visits are going on, she sends me a message that tells me how, you know, she's concerned about inappropriate behavior and she's concerned about this and she's concerned about that kind of lobbying me, you know, and John David ends up going from, you know, supervised days to supervised overnights at our home to the first unsupervised visit on January 30th of 2020.
	And on the January 30th, 2020, overnight visitation, the children are upset and expressing concerns over their uncle, who is Vicka's younger adopted son, brother, Vicka's younger adopted brother, that, you know, he, they didn't like him.
	He, you know, something about, he'd done something and the children, both children.
	Very upset. Nanook was particularly upset at the time and had said something to John David, you know, like, hey, you know, he's gotten in my bed and he's had, you know, he does this and he treats me bad and all this.
	No, nothing very specific other than just a very upset child over how things were with the community.
	Vicka's brother who's living at home.
	They're all living at home with Connie.
	All through this time and even through today, everybody's living at home with Connie regularly three miles from our home.
	And he shares this with Vicka when he picks the child up and says, look, I don't know what's going on, but the nuke is concerned.
	Ace is upset. I don't know what's going on.
	And he kind of shares this with Vicka.
	And then Apparently, which we find out later, on the next scheduled appointment with Dr.
	Berryman, Dr.
	Berryman alleges that a nuke came in and said that her daddy was being inappropriate and he put his privates in my private.
	So, I mean, the coincidence of that, like right when the children make these disclosures, which were recorded, by the way, right?
	That they're being treated badly by Connie's son or adopted son.
	So, they make these disclosures, which honestly, you know, since Connie seems to be leading this whole thing, makes Connie look really bad.
	And then, coincidentally, soon after, Connie's psychotherapist of choice is then saying that The child needs allegations.
	Psychologist, yes.
	And so she writes a letter to Judge Scarlett saying what I just told you to the family court, and apparently that gets reported out to DCS. And later, all of a sudden there's some new sexual abuse allegations,
	but these are now coming from Connie Regally's psychologist, who my son finds out had started seeing his daughter prior to the first DCS interview, four weeks prior to the first DCS interview, and has now been seeing this psychologist for, I think, 10 visits.
	This is happening against court orders that like DCS needs to be looking into this and this Connie psychologist needs to have nothing to do with this.
	Well, on the initial, they said do not talk to the child prior to our interview, but we found out later, much later, that she had, in fact, had four interviews with the child prior to the initial DCS interview where there's no disclosures.
	So she blatantly disregards the court order, basically, is what you're saying.
	Yes. And I don't know the level of the court order.
	I don't have visibility to all that.
	But I know for a fact, DCS told her, DCS told Dr.
	Berryman, do not talk to the child prior to our first interview.
	And she did. She met with the child four times before the first interview.
	First interview had no disclosures.
	And so they blocked the first interview for four months.
	Lo and behold, Jane Berryman comes out and makes this assertion to the court.
	Now this time, Vicka and Connie respond immediately to the DCS interview.
	There is this interview, and apparently the child goes in and discloses a cornucopia of heinous allegations against her father.
	But, you know, it's like she's a different person.
	She's like drawing and playing with Play-Doh and pointing at the anatomical designs and saying this and this.
	You know, she gets to the end of the interview and the interviewer says, well, why didn't you, you know, ask me about this previously or something like that?
	And then, you know, it's just...
	Weird. And so now, a new cloud is now over him, and he doesn't know what these allegations are.
	He's willing to talk to DCS. He says, yes, but because this is the second time, he wants his attorney there.
	He wants to know what the allegations are.
	Let's do an interview. DCS never does that.
	But they now have this within days of this thing with this 2-4-20...
	And the subsequent interview that happens immediately after that, he later finds out that there was supposed to be a forensics medical interview.
	Medical appointment with the daughter in that February.
	And Vicka ends up going to that appointment.
	She's not happy with the way things are.
	She says, do you know who I am?
	You know, yes, we know who you are because our kids have been sued by Connie regularly.
	We're doing this by the book and protocol.
	And she's not happy about that.
	And then she said, finally, after, you know, a long concession and things with our kids, they finally said, well, we can at least do the medical.
	you know the medical exam and so they go out to get the nurse practitioner and the nurse practitioner comes back to the room and they can the child are gone and and they go what they want her daughter's been raped why would you want to not do a medical exam
	Well, you're asking me for, you know, why, but what I can tell you is that they end up finding Vicka out, you know, in the outside, talking on the phone to her attorney, which was her mother, Connie, and she says, we're not doing any interview, we're not doing any medical exam, and she leaves.
	And so this whole action creates a cloud over my son, again, to block him from seeing his children.
	And they file TROs, ex parte TROs, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah.
	Well, this stays in now limbo for seven months, from February till July.
	And my son finally gets his attorney and says, hey, I want an evidentiary hearing in family court on these issues because this is a bunch of bull and this is wrong and I'm being blocked again from my children.
	So blocked four months.
	Then he sees his children for a couple of months and he's blocked again now for seven months.
	And so he schedules, you know, late July, they schedule an evidentiary hearing for him.
	September and he goes to court in September and in that evidentiary hearing he finds out that Janie Behrman, Dr.
	Behrman, had stopped seeing the child immediately after the allegations and then had subsequently begun seeing the child again at the end of July, apparently in preparation for the family court evidentiary hearing in September.
	Could I stop you right there?
	I mean, that alone seems extremely fishy.
	So the child after she makes...
	So how many times did Dr.
	Berryman see the child prior to the child making these allegations?
	10 or 12. And then soon after the Dr.
	Berryman stopped seeing the child?
	Yeah, I think they had two or three more visits and stopped seeing the child.
	So if a child...
	And then didn't see the child until July.
	So the allegation is that the child's been raped eight times by the father.
	So where is the logic in the child not having any form of therapy after this child made these serious allegations?
	I mean, that just alone seems extremely fishy.
	It seems as though they got what they needed, which is after a lot of distance from the father, whatever they were doing behind the scenes.
	I'm not accusing of manipulation, but it seems as though it would have benefited to them for the child to make these allegations.
	It just seems very fishy that once the child does make those allegations, there's no therapy, help for the child.
	They basically ignore it. It seems like they were just using that as a tool to get their end.
	I would have to agree with you.
	I mean, I don't understand it either.
	Because then they go to family court.
	Before they show up in family court, Dr.
	Harriman sends a letter to the judge saying that the children do not want to see their father.
	Both children do not want to see their father.
	And so they proceed with the evidentiary hearing.
	In the evidentiary hearing, the judge hears testimony from DCS. He watches the video, both videos.
	He's very familiar with the case.
	He hears testimony from Dr.
	Behrman. He hears testimony from My granddaughter in Chambers, he hears testimony from Vicka.
	He hears testimony from John David.
	He hears testimony from me.
	And at the end of the day, this is everything that's now been put up against my son.
	Everything. And he says, I thought he was going to take a break.
	He didn't even take a break. And he comes back and says, I know exactly what I'm going to do.
	He gets to see his children.
	So in family court, none of these allegations were taken very seriously.
	Your son gets to see his children, but yet nonetheless, criminal charges were made against him.
	Well, that's where we're going.
	I think the allegations were probably taken very seriously and weighed in the family court.
	I don't think he dismissed them at all.
	I think, you know, based on his ruling at the time, where now we went from an agreed order to, I'm ordering he gets to see his children.
	You know, he says, you know, he gets to see his children and he discounts it.
	He says, They're unfounded because I don't know why this man would have let my son see his children.
	And he said, I'm ordering supervised visits for your protection, pointing at my son.
	And so my son's back seeing the grandchildren again.
	And he made my wife and I the supervisors.
	And so we were then back on another ordered pendente light of starting to see the children.
	It was going to grow to You know, daytime visits with the daughter and the son, and then ultimately overnight visits for the son.
	And we actually set a date for the, we actually set a date for By now, they've actually agreed to an MDA. My son agreed to everything they wanted, but there was no parenting plan.
	So a date was set in December for the parenting plan to discuss all that.
	And so he starts seeing his children again, and then lo and behold, he is arrested on 13 counts of criminal charges by the DA in Rutherford County October 15, 2020.
	And we later found out that on October 5th, 2020, they finally went in and did the forensics interview.
	And what was the result of that?
	And the medical exam.
	It was negative. So it showed that the child had not been raped?
	Everything came back negative.
	How could they resume with charges when everything's come back negative?
	Well, I have no idea, but, you know, you talk to these people and they tell you, well, you know, it's very common that, you know, this happens.
	I mean, just to give you an idea, my son's almost 6'4".
	I mean, and his daughter is just a very petite and, at the time, six-year-old and subsequently seven-year-old child that's, you know, too tiny.
	And so I don't know.
	I have no explanation for any of that.
	All I do know is that I guess the medical exam hadn't been done, so the DA was not able to advance a case, and all of a sudden the medical exam is done.
	It's the only thing that Judge Scarlett didn't see in court that time, and he's arrested.
	And then he ends up going through a two-year process with a $100,000 bond, 13 counts.
	He's wearing an ankle monitor.
	He's prohibited from seeing his children and he hadn't seen his children since October of 2020.
	So let me ask you something here.
	Now, so despite there being no actual evidence Of John having done anything to his daughter, right?
	There's no actual tangible evidence.
	There is just this one disclosure, which then the child takes away and says she lied, right?
	Nonetheless, there is testimony by the children about abuses from Connie's son, right?
	There was never... No, there was never any testimony on that.
	There's a recording of the children saying that they're being mistreated by Connie's son.
	Right. That's never been testified to nor entered into evidence.
	It's something my son has.
	Why hasn't the court ever asked those questions of what Connie's son did since the children have already made this?
	So everything in family court, including the parenting plan that was set for December of 2020, it all freezes because we now have criminal charges.
	It almost seems like those criminal charges are perfectly timed to stop the discovery of anything else.
	I mean, it seems like a chess move to me.
	This is my opinion, which I'm entitled to.
	But it seems like a chess move in order to prevent the discovery of what happened between Connie's son and the two children.
	I don't know, because, you know, what happens in October 2020 when he's arrested, it freezes everything, it locks him out of everything, and he's then in this, you know, static frozen mode that goes on for two years.
	You know, and he doesn't know anything.
	He ends up getting some criminal.
	He's now got to go through and do his criminal case.
	We've had four court issues around this whole thing in two counties over the subsequent four, three years plus.
	And so it freezes things for this two years.
	And a lot of things didn't come out until criminal court two weeks ago that he found out that and was attested to an open court that, you know, Dr.
	Behrman was seeing the child prior to the first testimony, all this activity afterwards.
	That's when he found out about the RKIDS interviews and how that had happened.
	And that's when he actually found out about what had been alleged in the first interview because it was all part of that.
	It all came out in criminal court where the neighbor basically testified to what she said and everything.
	And my granddaughter took the stand in the criminal court And when asked about, you know, these allegations that were made in the DCS video, she said, yeah, I lied about a lot of things.
	And then when the prosecutor starts going down and saying, well, did this happen?
	Did this happen?
	She said, no. Did this happen?
	She said, no. And when you said, did this happen, we're talking about did your father basically rape you and all the answers.
	Yeah, he went through the list of specific allegations.
	That he had as charges against my son saying, did this happen?
	You know, he would insert name here.
	Did your father, you know, and I don't even want to repeat what was happening.
	These are heinous. I mean, we're talking about, you know, horrific.
	Basically, the allegation is that John, a grown man in his 30s, I think, raped his six-year-old daughter eight times.
	Well, we're talking oral, vaginal, anal, yeah.
	Everything. And the child is basically saying that never happened.
	She said no.
	On the stand, she said no.
	And she said she had lied.
	And she said she had lied about a lot of things.
	And then also there was a whole discussion about, well, you know, did your dad ever do anything?
	Well, he was inappropriate, you know.
	And inappropriate is a recurrent theme in this whole thing, inappropriate.
	And, you know, kissing and hugging is inappropriate.
	And Vicka would always say John David was inappropriate.
	And when she was specifically asked about, you know, what is inappropriate, she puts her hands to her left and right of her chest and says, you know, he touched me here.
	And they said, well, where else did he touch you?
	And, you know, they had the anatomical drawing and she drew her finger around her ankles.
	And she never pointed to her private parts or anything like that.
	This child is... I mean, it sounds like the child kind of has been led to believe that touching inappropriately means touching on the knees and touching on the knees.
	Well, you know, as it was played in the first DCS interview, she said, oh, well, this and this and this and this.
	However, that didn't...
	That's not what happened in open court under her testimony.
	And, you know, but she did on the anatomical drawings.
	She knew were her...
	Lady parts were.
	She knew where her butt was and all that.
	And, you know, because this happened in open court, you know, I can tell you this is what happened.
	But, yeah, and so she was the second witness out and the DA was furious.
	And then we went through a five-day trial, basically, where every state witness, DCS, CAC, our kids, had all come in, said yes, Connie had sued them, Connie had obstructed them, Connie had delayed them, you know, and basically, in my opinion, made the case for the defense.
	The defense ran out for, you know, four days, and then the judge says, we're ending this trial tomorrow.
	I don't understand. Why would the judge want to end it tomorrow?
	I don't know. It was originally set for five days.
	We chewed up four days, you know, picking the jury and hearing the state's testimony.
	And he said, we're not going into Monday.
	It had been a discussion of moving.
	This started on a Monday.
	We're going to go into Monday.
	And he told the prosecutor and the defense, once the state rested, that we're not going into Monday.
	This trial will be over on Friday.
	It doesn't matter how long it goes.
	And, you know, the state failed to call.
	They had Connie and Vicka on their witness list, but they failed to call Connie and Vicka.
	And they said, well, we can, you know, you can't use that against us because they're available to you.
	And John David's attorney's like, well, they have never replied to me.
	And, you know, even though we had subpoenas for Connie, she did not reply.
	And so the defense says, well, we can have her here in 30 minutes.
	And this is like, you know, one o'clock on Thursday of a five-day trial.
	And they didn't show up.
	The judge finally dismisses.
	Jury at 3.30 in the afternoon up till after 4 and they finally show up and the judge says will you be back here at 8.30 in the morning and you know then the conversation was well you know where do we go from here and what do we do?
	And so, you know, the decision was made, well, it's going to be very difficult to call them as hostile witnesses.
	I guess the rules of evidence and all this stuff compressed with this timetable that the judge has put on them.
	And so John David's attorney felt like we have, you know, we have beyond a reasonable doubt made our case that the state has completely failed to make its case.
	Everything I've been sharing with you up till now has come out in this court proceedings.
	The jury heard it all.
	And so the defense rested on Friday morning.
	They went immediately into closing arguments.
	And, you know, the state basically completely ignored the testimony of my granddaughter on the stand.
	Jumped back to the, you know, the second DCS interview.
	And then said that they agreed that Chani and Vicka had obstructed his case.
	He said he tried to justify, he said this was the worst plan ever if this was their plan.
	And he tried to, he intimated That, you know, probably the reason they did all this was because they were afraid of being criminally involved for not reporting things that they should have reported, and he rested.
	And, you know, we were pretty convinced that finally this nightmare was going to be over, that no common sense person could look at this and see it for anything other than what it was.
	So just to recap here for the viewer, I want to make sure the viewer understands what's transpired thus far, right?
	So, you know, obviously you guys have gone through years of hell leading up to this moment.
	Now you guys go into court.
	Your granddaughter says that no such, you know, answers no to all the questions about sexual abuse rate, right?
	Following this, or prior to this, there's a lot of other witnesses that basically make the case that no such thing happened.
	No, I don't want to say that.
	I'm not going to say that. What the state witnesses acknowledged and agreed to was ongoing obstruction.
	Failure to...
	DCS testified that Connie and Vicka Refused court orders to present the child for interview.
	You know, our kids testified that Connie had sued them previously and that Vicka had refused the medical exam immediately following this disclosure.
	And that, you know, that she failed to do that and didn't do it until almost nine months later, and they testified that it all came back negative.
	So, in other words, the...
	Everything that we've been talking about that you say sounds suspicious and questionable and why would you do that?
	And they were asked this on the stand.
	Why would somebody delay this?
	Why would somebody refuse this?
	Why would somebody not want to find this out?
	Why would somebody not take their daughter to a pediatrician or get a medical exam done if in fact this had happened?
	Even Dr. Berryman Had testified that she saw the child before the first interview, saw the child 10 times before the second interview, that the child had never expressed anything about sexual allegations after, even leading up to the evidentiary hearing.
	And Dr.
	Behrman tried to wave it off when asked about the medical and the delay of the medical exam.
	She was like, well, why?
	The child was fine.
	And she also acknowledged she'd never seen the child afterwards for any, you know, psychology or therapy after these heinous allegations that allegedly happened.
	So, question, just before we get to the judgment, what are the other side, if they were to be sitting on this call right now, what would they say is the evidence that anything inappropriate happened to this child?
	It's that one disclosure to Dr.
	Berryman, or is there anything else beyond that?
	Well, it goes back to the one disclosure to Dr.
	Berryman and the second DCS interview immediately following that disclosure.
	So basically right after that disclosure, the same day there was a DCS interview with the child?
	No, no, it was within days.
	And the child made the same allegations in that DCS interview.
	Well, apparently, according to Dr.
	Berryman, the child said he put his privates and my privates.
	She stopped the interview and made the referral.
	Then the child goes into the CAC interview, and this was played in open court, and then starts going through saying, well, you know, this is my lady part.
	This is it. Yes, he did this.
	And yes, he did this. Very matter-of-factly.
	Yes, he did this. Yes, he did this.
	Yes, he did this. And that was it.
	And there was never any disclosure or discussion about those allegations or anything prior.
	The other thing that Dr.
	Berryman acknowledged on the intake form done four weeks prior to the first DCS interview, that she has per mom and per grandmom, which would be Connie, that the child had made allegations about, you know, her privates and all this other stuff, which the child never discusses.
	Until, or never brings up until the 2-4-2020 with Dr.
	Berryman. And in depositions with Vicka that were done for, you know, just recently, she says that the child never told her that.
	So Connie and Vicka are telling DCS, they're telling everybody else things that have happened and puppeted this narrative that's in the 10, you know, the 1019 that the child doesn't say until, you know, February, and then never says again.
	But it's a narrative that's being advanced by Connie and Vicka, and all of a sudden they're semi-compliant with DCS, refusing our kids' medical forensics.
	And all that just goes static because my son's blocked from seeing his children for seven months until he calls the evidentiary hearing against himself to have this all vetted in family court.
	This all came out.
	I just want to clear this up.
	Everything that I've just shared with you all came out in open court.
	I mean, the insane thing about all this is there's a fog of war that's created in all of this.
	And within this fog of war, what's happened is that a man is literally facing what I believe is a death sentence.
	And I'll explain why I think it's a death sentence.
	On an actual level within the courts, it's up to 250 years in jail, right?
	So the viewer that's listening to this...
	I hope you understand that there's been a fog of war that's created within this breakdown of this marriage.
	And within the fog of war, as you see, what's happened is that whenever John's tried to see his child, these false allegations, or allegations, let's call them allegations, let's say they're false right now, The man doesn't see his daughter for a prolonged period of time, and the daughter says nothing about these allegations until it's to Connie's specific psychologist or psychotherapist, am I saying correctly?
	Psychologist. Psychologist.
	And based upon that, based upon these most flimsy of circumstances where, you know, a child could be manipulated, a child's thoughts could be manipulated, because he's only six, seven years old, a man is facing 250 years in jail.
	And I hope some people understand the tragedy of what's happening right now to this man, because In no other courts would it be possible for somebody to be facing 250 years in jail other than something stemming from family law.
	But anyway, so now tell me the conclusion of where this all goes, you know, Elliot.
	So yeah, my son and his attorney are told that the court The case is going to end Friday.
	They do the closing arguments.
	My son and his attorney are feeling, you know, you're never bullish with a jury because you never know.
	But they're feeling, you know, optimistic, beyond optimistic, that there's just no way a jury of his peers could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this even rose to that, especially after family court...
	A judge who rules on preponderance of the evidence said it didn't even meet that standard.
	And so the jury got the deliberations at about 1 o'clock without a lunch break.
	They're told they can do a working lunch through deliberations.
	We get called back into court a little after 5 o'clock on Friday, and the jury comes back and convicts my son on 13 counts.
	of rape and sexual abuse of his daughter.
	Wow. And he's immediately remanded into jail.
	His bond is revoked and sentencing isn't set until April of 2023.
	So he's in jail till April of 2023.
	He has to wait for sentencing before he can even file a request for new trial or an appeal.
	So it seems like his last three and a half, four years of his life has pretty much been shattered because of, I mean, seems like because he wanted to see his kids, because he wanted to be a father in his children's lives.
	I mean, how would you describe what happened in the last three or four years?
	My son has done everything in his power.
	I just want to say this, if anybody has any questions.
	If my son had done anything like this, the last thing he'd have to worry about is criminal court.
	That's a very last thing he would have to worry about.
	And, you know, I've been married to my wife for 40 plus years.
	We did not raise our children this way.
	My son has not had any legal issues until he got involved with Connie Regely and Vicka.
	And, you know, he's a good man.
	He was trying to provide for his family.
	You know, he has wanted to take care of his children.
	He lost his job as soon as he got arrested.
	And he had a great job making $60,000 a year.
	He was paying child support.
	He ends up going on unemployment and continues to make child support, sending almost all of his unemployment for child support until it finally runs out.
	And this is after he's arrested on criminal charges and blocked from seeing his children and having to wear an ankle monitor.
	So, you know, all he's tried to do all through this is just, you know, be an upstanding father and take care of his children.
	Your innocence. How does a man prove his innocence in this environment?
	And I don't in any way, shape, or form blame my granddaughter.
	She has been living with Connie and Vicka in their home.
	She has, you know, she has depended on them.
	I'm not even sure she knows what has happened and the repercussions of this.
	The victims here are her, her brother, and my son.
	Because this family, that family, my son's family, has been crushed.
	And it's also been an effort to destroy our family.
	I have requested repeatedly to see my grandchildren over the last three years.
	I've been blocked and told, you know, no.
	What is Connie's, since she's in charge, pretty much, seems like it.
	What is her logic of not letting you see your own grandchildren?
	Well, you know, Connie's running for judge this year and I finally started speaking out.
	She ended up filing criminal contempt charges against me because I was telling people, Connie regularly is blocking me from seeing my grandchildren and here she's running on a court.
	She wants to be a family court judge.
	And so she didn't like that and I went to one of her campaign events.
	I stood up and I I told the people at the campaign event and she knew I was coming and I asked and she gave some flimsy response to well your your your visitation rights with your grandchildren come through your son and that's not my responsibility and that's not My daughter's responsibility, that comes through your son.
	Well, she's done everything in her power to make sure that our rights as grandparents under the provisional laws of Tennessee were blocked from using any of that to try to get to our children.
	I will also tell the viewers, ironically, that Connie regularly has been found guilty Of criminal charges in a case that stems from 2018.
	And she kept telling people, no, that's false allegations.
	False allegations. She was found guilty and convicted of felony violations of harboring the children of a client.
	Where she was keeping them from DCS, very similar to the first time the children were kept.
	She's also been found guilty in District Court of Rule 11 violations, which are the rules that govern attorney behavior.
	I think she had 11.
	Are these criminal allegations and criminal charges?
	The Rule 11 violations are attorney violations by the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility that governs the behavior of attorneys.
	Connie's got a list on Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility.
	She has 14 previous Instances of rule violations and conduct violations prior.
	This was in a Rule 11 violation stemming back to sexual abuse allegations on a case that had been going on for eight years where she had sued Williamson County, the family court judge, the DA, the juvenile center for alleged sexual abuse allegations that happened to one of her clients inside the juvenile facility.
	And she'd sued them for 10 million dollars.
	That all resulted in these 11 Rule 11 violations.
	Two of those that she was found guilty of in Rule 11 violations.
	One was false allegations.
	The other one was false information.
	And that got her license suspended.
	So she has, I mean, she has a verifiable history of making false allegations and bending or breaking the rules.
	Well, as it came out in court, yes.
	And she's now been arrested for aggravated perjury Tied back to that case, and she is standing for criminal felony conviction.
	Her trial is the end of January 2023 on aggravated perjury.
	The difference in aggravated perjury is you lied on the stand.
	Aggravated perjury is you lied with intent to affect an outcome, and it's a felony.
	Would you say the reason why she didn't take the stand and she didn't allow her daughter to take the stand in the case against John was because she didn't want to get caught for more aggravated perjury?
	Well, I have no idea.
	That ironically was the decision made by the DA. When Connie was subpoenaed for depositions, which were done through the family court side, she She said,
	I'm going to get this squashed, went to the DA and got the DA to send a cease and desist on family court matters in depositions for family court and forced my son's attorney to turn over any depositions that he had.
	So the DA knew where they were going with their case before the criminal case started.
	I'm confused. Could you explain, elaborate on this point a little further?
	Well, in the closing, leading up to the family court, I mean, leading up to the criminal court, the DA kind of intervened into the family court process and said, hey, you're trying to get an unfair advantage, and he forced his way into that and forced that they hand over Vicka's deposition in family court,
	and I believe that may be why he refused to call Vicka and Connie, because based on That deposition alone was exculpatory and, you know, would have just blown his case apart.
	He didn't call them.
	He didn't call them. He didn't call his own witnesses.
	Yeah. Is there anything that we've forgotten to talk about in terms of what's been happening with John and what he's facing?
	Well, my wife and I are destroyed.
	You know, they're trying to take my son's life and they're trying to steal my grandchildren.
	I mean, where it sits today, absent an intervention, a miracle move on behalf of the Lord, You know, this is just unbelievable that we sit here today where we are and this is the outcome where a man can have this kind of weaponization put against him.
	I've subsequently learned that this is called the silver bullet divorce.
	And that in a silver bullet divorce, it's the elevation of either spousal abuse or sexual abuse.
	I actually have a video and I think I sent you the link to a prosecutor in the state of Texas teaching family court judges how to use these kinds of allegations in family court To get what they want.
	And this is her term. To get what they want and leverage in a divorce proceeding.
	And basically greenlighting them to do it, saying the DAs aren't going to pick this up.
	You know, this is actually helping us if you do this over in that court, because that's over there.
	So the DAs won't pick up?
	The DA's won't pick up anything having to do with false allegations, perjury within court, fraud within court.
	So it's like you could basically, she's saying you could do perjury, you could do fraud within the court, you could destroy a man or a woman's life based upon false accusations, and don't worry about it, the DA's not going to do anything about it.
	Well, of course, she didn't say that.
	That's what she's kind of articulated, but she green-lighted the behavior, and in essence, yes, that's exactly the outcome.
	Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's insane.
	It's such a scummy world, this whole family law.
	I mean, is there...
	One thing I just want to clarify.
	Is there Connie's fingerprints...
	Over the inception of these false allegations.
	Do you think, like, it seems like the first moment these allegations were made about any abuse was through her daughter, Vicka, to the next-door neighbor.
	Do you think that this was something that Connie's been, you know, driving this bus all along, basically, of essentially making sure that John is erased from his children's life?
	You know, Vim, I don't know.
	It feels that way because, you know, this is her world.
	This is what she does. She would sit at the dining table with my son and his family.
	There was open conversations about sexual abuse allegation cases.
	They had been in that she was involved in and you know according to my son fairly graphic details on those allegations and how she had prevailed and you know done this and done that.
	All I know is that she had previously sent a text message which has been verified that You know, she was going to take the children.
	She'd done it with the twin sister's daughter.
	In 2021, May of 2021, she actually filed dependency and neglect in family court to take the children from her daughter.
	And my wife and I intervened.
	My son was involved in that.
	Victor was involved in that.
	And my wife and I intervened because we're like, we're being blocked from seeing our grandchildren.
	We wanted to see our grandchildren.
	That was headed towards hearings and depositions in that.
	And all of a sudden, lo and behold, Connie non-suited it and dropped it.
	So anytime, you know, the I don't know about the motivations.
	I don't know about, you know, you're asking me was she doing this or what.
	All I know is that there is a pattern of, you know, there's 199 filings in my son's divorce case.
	Every time he tried to get close to seeing his children, there was contempt and TROs and block and obfuscation.
	It seems like she was doing everything possible within her power, basically using all the family law court tricks just to make sure John doesn't see his kids.
	Well, exactly. Which is, you know, what I find most repulsive about this particular attorney is that for years she has been acting as though she is some kind of savior to the corruption in family courts.
	That she's all about parents.
	She's all about taking corruption away.
	She's all about children getting to grow up with both their parents.
	And what you're telling me greatly contradicts what the message she's sending out to the world in terms of who she is and what she represents.
	I believe that's why she sued me for contempt when she was running for judge because all of a sudden her pristine image, she runs the Family Forward Foundation.
	She has 18,000 followers on Facebook.
	Her moniker is Stop Separating Families.
	She presents herself as a warrior on behalf of A lot of downtrodden people.
	If anybody's ever been through the family court process in DCS, it is scary.
	There is lots and lots of cases where people feel like they've been used, abused, and by the system, you know, the system.
	Ironically, in this particular case, the system was doing everything in its power.
	My son was doing everything in its power to make sure the system was working.
	But, you know, Connie's going to Washington and lobbying people that, you know, stop separating families.
	She has taken cases and lobbied for cases for grandparents that have been estranged from their children.
	But in the meantime, this is what's happening in her own family, you know, to the point where I think I've got a picture someplace of my...
	My granddaughter holding up a sign that said, stop separating families, which is ironic as all get out.
	But yes, Connie has presented herself as a warrior.
	And the fact that she has not defended her own family based on this.
	I've never gotten a call from Connie saying, we need to make this right.
	We need to do this correctly.
	All I've gotten is obfuscation, Delayed and all my son's gotten is obstruction and you know refusing to comply with court and keeping him from seeing his children, which he's still fighting for today.
	I mean if he had the chance today he'd be fighting for seeing his children just so he can be a father in their lives.
	I don't know what else to say.
	Yeah, yeah. I mean, is it harsh to say that Connie is a fraud?
	She's not necessarily practicing what she preaches, that she'll do anything to cover up the fact that she is just like the worst of the worst of family law attorneys?
	Yeah, well, she's suspended now, so she can't practice anymore.
	She's trying to set herself up now as an advisory non-profit advocate to get people so she can advise them.
	You know, that's what you said.
	I'm a little hesitant to jump into that fracas.
	All I can tell you is this is the evidence.
	This is what's happened.
	And the appearance is it's about as As aggressive and abusive as it could be, you know?
	And I've heard, I've had probably over a thousand people connect with me on Facebook because they've heard the story.
	And if somebody wants to check out my Facebook, there's actually a video of my son seeing his children after being blocked for the seven months.
	You can decide. Which is crazy, which is I've seen that video, which according to...
	This narrative that they've tried to create, this child was raped eight times by her father, yet when you watch that video, the way this child runs up to the father in that moment, I mean, I don't know how somebody could look at that video and even question whether John's a great father.
	I don't either, Vim.
	And let me just tell you, that was over a year and a half after the initial allegations.
	That was seven months after the quote-unquote disclosure video.
	That's how the children responded to their father.
	And I don't know how anybody looked at that.
	And draws anything but that conclusion.
	And ironically, that video was played in court.
	And the jury saw that video.
	And it was actually played during the testimony of Janie Berryman.
	So, you know, how...
	How they came back with their verdict is just, it's just inconceivable.
	I think it's very important that we call for an investigation in the county.
	And her behavior, in particular, the case of what's happening with your son, John Cunningham.
	Because from what you've told me, she has a history of bending the rules, perjury, as you were saying, aggravated perjury.
	She hasn't been convicted of that yet, but she's been arrested for it.
	She's been arrested for that.
	So, if somebody's been arrested for murder, do you give them the murder weapon again?
	I mean, the logic of it is that this is somebody that's clearly had issues with her conduct and misconduct.
	Well, she's been found guilty of felony charges for harboring children.
	She's been found guilty of Rule 11 violations that include false allegations and falsifying documents, false information.
	So, you know, we kept thinking, my son and his attorney really kept believing at some point in time, the DA would surely drop this case because It just continues to become more bizarre.
	I mean, you know, I don't think, as a Hollywood screenwriter, you can write this story.
	It's that crazy.
	And, you know, I just, I don't know.
	I just don't know. I think we need to call for an investigation into Connie first and foremost.
	But the other point that I want to make is that this is a worst case scenario.
	And in a way, it's what's happening to your son.
	Had to have happened to somebody.
	And I don't say that in callous fashion because these family courts are so out of control.
	Before your son's case, a lot of the time, these kind of false allegations are contained within the family court.
	So what happens is that you have a parent, usually a father that's separated from their child, and they go through all kinds of traumatic stuff.
	Uh, heinous, heinous traumatic, uh, injuries, uh, because they can't see their children.
	That's how bad it was.
	Now, what's happened with this particular case is that those kind of false allegations and game playing of the family courts that are utilized to separate parents from their children have now transcended the family court.
	They've gone into the criminal realm.
	And the fact that your son is facing 250 years because of the Techniques that often happen in family courts, I believe is the dam that had to break for people to understand how insanely corrupt these family courts are.
	And I'm not saying that in particular to the family court you guys experienced, because that actually seemed like one of the better versions of family courts.
	I'm just talking about these games that these dexatious attorneys play in order to get their way We're seeing the fruits of that right now, and we're tapping to your sons.
	The evil, evil fruits of that.
	Well, you know, what I was going to say, and I didn't get to it because I got excited and went somewhere else, but I've had a thousand people or more that are following me on Facebook.
	That have had that very experience.
	They have been drug through family court.
	They have been exercised by...
	I know there may be bad judges out there, but this is lawyers.
	Lawyers taking advantage of a system Family court is a parallel world.
	It runs on its own rules and regulations.
	My son has spent over $200,000 between family court and criminal court defending himself and trying to, you know, See his children and defend his life.
	But you're right, Vim.
	This is an epidemic.
	It happens to women some, but it happens to men more.
	Sorry to interrupt you.
	If I could just make a point on that, it happens to men all the time.
	This week alone, there's been three fathers murdered in custody exchanges.
	Three fathers murdered this week alone, right?
	I've seen friends in jail, I've seen friends left and right die of things like pancreatic cancer, which I believe that these assaults on the individuals harm the immune system.
	We already have the studies that show that extreme amounts of stress, especially something that frankly like you would witness in genocides and world wars, which when you have Excuse me.
	When you have somebody like Hitler separating children, they say, oh, that's trauma when you separate parents from their children, when we're looking at World War II. But doing that within our own courts, we ignore the trauma of that and what it does to people, what it does to families, you know?
	Oh, yeah. I agree 100%.
	I've talked to so many people That, you know, suffer genuine PTSD. I have to believe it's affected those children the same.
	And I've talked to children that have actually been through this systems and they all say the same thing.
	They're horribly traumatized.
	Many of them don't go the route my son went because they don't have the family.
	They don't have an infrastructure of support.
	They don't have the financial resources.
	And they end up just walking away, or they end up getting run over in a family court system.
	Yes, the system failed them, but because of these aggressive allegations that are propagated, and in my opinion, the abuse of the system by these very aggressive attorneys.
	It's not just an opinion, man.
	It's not an opinion, Elliot.
	This is what's happening all the time.
	There's Literally a genocide happening right now.
	A genocide that is fueled by these family courts.
	I know too many friends that have died.
	I know too many friends that are in jail.
	I know too many friends that have had their lives destroyed and this is why I'm so passionate about this topic.
	But where this case differs from all the others is that rather than just destroying this man and or this woman's life and putting him, you know, in a corner where they just like deplete and basically fade away, this has now transcended into the criminal world where these allegations from family court that were not even holding water in family court are now...
	Potentially putting this man in jail for 250,000 years, 250 years, sorry.
	And what's most disgusting about that, I know John personally, and this is again why I feel so passionate about this topic.
	You know, John is one of the most sensitive human beings, right?
	This is not, like to put- You're talking about my son, John David.
	Your son John, like, to put this man in jail, like, in jail where they literally murder child molesters, if there's, and it's irony because in jail, you know, a lot of these pedophile and perverts actually get true justice where our legal system also ignores the true damage that perverts like that do.
	But to put John in jail, With such lack of evidence for those charges, we're giving that man a death sentence.
	And that's why, also, I feel so passionate about this, because the way I read this situation, and this is my opinion, and I know Connie's going to be listening to this, is that Connie did everything in her power as a lawyer to bend and break the rules in order to separate John from his kids,
	and went to the extremities that she has gone to right now, Even though this man's life is at risk for all the groundwork she did in trying to separate this man from his children.
	So I don't know what you feel about that rant, but I just wanted to kind of put that forward because this is something that I'm extremely passionate about.
	Well, Van, I know you and I have never met, and I know you kind of connected with me because you've actually met my son, John David, and I appreciate what you had to say about him.
	I appreciate you even taking an interest in this because The people that have tried to pick this up as a banner and even say anything, they get sued.
	They get aggravation.
	I've had trolls come against me personally that are part of some network.
	That's why they call it parental alienation.
	The goal through the family court system is to alienate you financially, alienate you from family and friends using these horrific tactics, isolate you from anybody around you.
	You mentioned the people that have been murdered just this week and handoffs.
	Those were horribly escalated before those occurrences.
	And those were headed towards this trajectory.
	I know for a fact I've had so many family members, like people my age, that have reached out and said that because of this parental alienation process and tactics in family court, that their son,
	their daughter, but mostly sons, have ended up committing suicide Not because of guilt for what they've been accused of, but because of the shame and their inability to defend themselves and provide for their families.
	This is an epidemic in our country.
	And it is a terrible, terrible assault on the family and an assault in this particular case against my son.
	And John David, he's a rock-solid guy.
	And he, today, as he sits in jail, is hopeful, he is optimistic that he is going to be vindicated and exonerated of this horrible wrong.
	And it has now turned from me encouraging my son over the last couple of years to he's now encouraging me.
	And I'm going to tell you, our hope has been crushed.
	We feel forsaken.
	But because of people like you, and because of friends that have rallied around us and not abandoned us, and because of people that have reached out and shared their own testimonies and their own stories, I'm starting to at least feel like perhaps the hope my son has is a hope I can have as well.
	Yeah, yeah. I mean, Ellie, you should have hope.
	There's a lot of people that have been through Frankly, these horrible tragedies all coming out of the family courts.
	And all we could do at this point is really be vocal and get this story out because I don't believe that John deserves anything that's happened to him the last three years.
	Whether it's the ankle monitor or whether it's him sitting in jail right now waiting to be sentenced in April.
	So we're gonna do what we can.
	Well, Vim, I really do appreciate it.
	And for everybody that's hung in this far, End of the interview, thank you for at least listening.
	Thank you. Thank you, Elliot.

▲