This letter is representative of emails, texts and phone calls received over the past 12 years.   The letter was (edited) by Chuck Cox to remove potential specific identifying information that might endanger the author.   We constantly receive letters, phone calls and Facebook Messages, and referrals for “clients” needing help or to thank us, share their information or voice their support.    This activity often increases after one of the Specials about Susan is broadcast or rebroadcast and another person discovers Susan’s story.   Re enforcing our belief that telling Susan’s story is helping others.

We appreciate all of them.   Thank you “Friends and supporters” and especially the Author your words and effort were very comforting and I felt they needed to be shared.

Dear: Chuck and Judy Cox

I hope that life is finding you well. You actually don’t know me but I have been meaning to write for quite a while. I have two boys, ages (deleted). Over a year ago we fled from a domestic violence situation where our lives were in danger.

I wanted you write you and let you know of an experience I had with your daughter Susan (deleted) years ago. I had been married for about 2 years at the time. My oldest boy was about two years old at the time, and I was pregnant with another child. My Marriage had become extremely abusive and dangerous. I wanted to leave with my entire soul and body. I had spoken with an attorney and was getting ready to tell my husband that I was leaving with the children the following day. I remember very distinctly sitting in my bedroom, thinking about what I was going to say to my husband, when Susan came into my thoughts. I realized and felt strongly that she was in the room with me. The words came to my mind “Don’t tell him you are leaving him, just do it. I made that mistake and it cost me dearly”. I made the decision that I would never tell my husband I was leaving. I later found out that was completely right. I had not realized at that moment in my trauma and fear, that I was about to do something that would have endangered not only me but also my children. I of course have since learned that most women die when they tell their abusers they are leaving. [this is a critical time, and the most dangerous time for the abuse victim(s)]

I ended up speaking with multiple attorney’s and studying the “Family Court System”. Which led me to the decision that staying was the best bet at the time. It was unimaginable to me for my Husband to have unsupervised visitation with my children. (#1) I ended up staying with my husband for several years.[ and enduring the abusive while sheltering my children to the best of my ability]. Until my boys were (deleted)older, and I realized that my husband was going to end my life.

I have felt strongly that Susan wants me to write this letter to tell you [about my experience] and to tell you that she loves you. And to let you know that she and your grandchildren [Charlie and Braden] are helping people on the other side. She [Susan] saved our lives! I cannot express enough of a thankyou to you and to her. I am including a picture of my boys and my hands together for you. I have not included our names as we are still involved in the “Family Court System” (#1), and it is a monster all [on] it’s own. I also want to express my grief to you for the loss you have experienced!! I want you to know that because of what Susan told me, we have lived. I live every day of my life trying to help other women in my situation to see hope ant to move forward. Her [Susan’s] actions from the eternities have saved our lives. I consider all women that I meet who are going through this my eternal sisters. I consider your daughter as an eternal sister to whom I am eternally grateful! I hope and pray that life is finding you well, and that peace can be with you until you are reunited with your precious daughter and grand babies.

With Eternal Regards! [AFriend]

___________________________________________________________________________________

(#1)   “AFriend’s” evaluation of  the Family Court system as another Monster, is very true.

It was proven and decided by a jury that DSHS was negligent in allowing unsupervised visits and ignoring the warning signs of domestic violence.    Making them the proximate cause of Charlie and Braden’s death.   And awarding a large financial judgement against the State.    There have been changes to DSHS quietly across the nation.  (Officially it wasn’t because of the ruling of course).   

The Judge then attempted to negate the jury by reducing the amount.    The State has never accepted the Jury’s verdict or acknowledged any fault or the flaws in their system proven by the evidence presented in the trial.  

So children continue to be endangered by the Family Court System.   We await the appeal process which the State intends to drag out as long as possible.    The State has argued that DSHS and State has no responsibility for the safety of Children in their care, although in previous cases the appeals court told them that safety of the children was their primary responsibility.   Negligent employees were promoted and the failure to follow required domestic abuse policy continues.  

Familcide After a 6-year national study of domestic violence and familicide a new domestic violence policy, training and screening process was established in 2008.   And still today I hear judges and other professionals making comments that refer to the outdated definitions of domestic violence from years ago.   Many people Victims, Police, Judges, continue to think of domestic violence as bruises and hitting, while the study found that the emotional abusers are the most likely to commit familicide.   Physical abuse is still a terrible crime but Abuse always escalates.   Domestic violence is about control.   I hope that telling Susan’s story has helped some abusers to reexamine their own actions and decide to change.   Education is the one tool that is not limited by the laws of the land.  

 The Family court system, also known unofficially as “Liar’s court”, because the judge must assume that everything anyone says is the truth.   So either side may lie and be believed.

>If Person “A” says that the water was “red” and Person “B” says the water was “brown”  then the judge says there was water, but the color is unknown.   

>If Person A says the water was “red” and Persons B doesn’t disagree then the water was “red”.

> If Person A says that person B abused the child, and Person B says there was no abuse, then there was no abuse.   If Person B supplies evidence, a photo, or other irrefutable evidence that Person A was lying, then the evidence simply establishes a fact but everything else Person A says is presumed to be the truth, even though Person B proved that Person A lied about the one item.  

So remember if you don’t disprove, or at least deny an accusation you are agreeing with it.  (Maybe).   (What a  system)

The United States Supreme Court has said:

The Court explained that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects this liberty, incorporating “the right to marry, establish a home, and bring up children.” Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925)

Many courts and those in the family justice system, are stuck with rulings protecting Parental rights, unfortunately these rulings fail to protect the safety of the child.   Children do not have rights until they turn 18, depending on individual state laws,  but of course Federal Laws and the constitution overrule States rights.

Before 2000: Supreme Court Upholds Parental Rights

Prior to 2000, the Supreme Court followed the doctrine that parents have a fundamental right to direct the upbringing and education of their children. Parents were assumed to be the best caretakers for their child unless proven unfit. Our nation consistently maintained that parents possess a fundamental right to raise their children as they see fit.
It is the natural duty of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life. – Meyer v. State of Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923)

2000 Troxel Ruling:
There’s Now No Clear Precedent

Rather than continuing to uphold the Parental Rights Doctrine clearly established in previous cases, the Supreme Court’s split decision in Troxel v. Granville (2000) opened the door for individual judges and States to apply their own rules to parental rights.

Troxel in a NutshellOn the one hand…On the other hand…

A Washington state law gave any person the ability to override a good parent’s decision about visitation by simply claiming that it would be “best” for children to allow the third-party to have visitation rights. When the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed the law in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000):