Quest on for tighter control
Standards, enforcement seen as lacking in many Family Court cases
Four years ago, 2-year-old Kyra Franchetti was found dead inside a smoldering home in Virginia with two bullet holes in her back.
The toddler had been shot by her father, Roy Rumsey, who then torched the house and killed himself.
Two months earlier, Rumsey had been in Nassau County Family Court, where he made what turned out to be a final appearance in a 20-month struggle over Kyra’s custody. Her mother, Jacqueline Franchetti, had made allegations that her ex-boyfriend was suicidal and had been stalking her. But Judge Danielle Peterson apparently did not give much weight to the allegations, which are the type frequently made by parents in similar proceedings.
“I will tell you for sure,” Peterson said, according to a court transcript, “I haven’t heard anything in this case that would make me think that Mr. Rumsey is an inappropriate guardian for this child.”
In retrospect, the questions raised in Rumsey’s case apply broadly in the Family Court system, where judges are charged with deciding whether a parent’s allegations are credible.
Family Court judges often handle dozens of cases a day, and lack time to independently investigate allegations. In Franchetti’s
case, the two officials who had the opportunity to dig more deeply into Rumsey’s background were an attorney assigned to represent Kyra’s interests and a mental health professional, known as a forensic evaluator, who was retained to write a lengthy assessment of the parents.
Franchetti casts blame on both officials, but it’s difficult to objectively say they failed: There are few specific, enforceable standards in New York law regulating key aspect of these officials’ conduct. That’s something Franchetti is hoping to change.
Since the July 2016 death of her daughter, Franchetti has kept a list of children allegedly killed by a parent in the midst of their parents’ legal battle in New York, a number that currently stands at 16. She has become a prominent advocate in Albany for reform of forensic evaluations and better child safety in the Family Court system.
“I don’t want to see this happen to any other child,” Franchetti said. “I want this to stop.”
Franchetti says in the absence of clear, rigorous standards and appropriate training, biases against abused women also have crept into Family Court.
One of the most recent deaths was the January murder case involving Thomas Valva, an autistic 8-year-old boy allegedly killed on Long Island by his father and the man’s girlfriend. The preceding Family Court case, in which several key officials sided with the father, has highlighted the ways in which abuse claims are often brushed aside.
In Franchetti’s case, her ex-boyfriend did not fit the profile of a dangerous parent under the standards commonly applied in Family Court. Rumsey worked with the CIA for an aerospace and defense contractor in Virginia, a position that would typically require extensive vetting. He had no known arrest record or documented history of physical violence.
Rumsey also had a volcanic temper. According to several experts on domestic violence, he fit the mold of someone who used verbal and emotional abuse to assert control. When Rumsey murdered Kyra, it likely wasn’t an act of simple anger or insanity, but a final outburst after a years-long quest for control, according to experts familiar with the case.
Burning his home to ashes amid a murder-suicide was characteristic of a particular type of killing, called “revenge annihilation,” that’s not uncommon in child fatality cases, Franchetti said.
When Kyra was 6 months old, Rumsey purchased a pair of guns, including one that would be used in the murder. The guns were purchased the same day Franchetti had hired a trial attorney in the Family Court case, 22 months before the murder.
Rumsey also poured accelerant around his house well in advance of the day he lit the fire, Virginia police told Franchetti. During heated arguments before the murder, she recalled, Rumsey would say, “You’ll be sorry.”
The domestic violence experts interviewed for this story said it’s common for abusers to operate in a mode of “coercive control” that uses abuse as a means of power in relationships. The level of violence can escalate in order to meet those demands. Franchetti’s allegations of Rumsey stalking her on multiple occasions should have been taken as a fairly serious indicator, said Dr. Mo Therese Hannah, a psychologist and professor at Siena College.
“A lot of batterers stalk their victims, and it’s no small matter to be stalked,” Hannah said. “It’s a type of coercive control.”
Franchetti, a public relations executive, met Rumsey in Washington, D.C., where they had been members of the same triathlon club. During their first year as a couple, Rumsey was incredibly considerate, she said.
The second year, things changed dramatically: Rumsey would practically stand on top of Franchetti when he would yell at her, she said, calling her an “idiot” and “stupid.” Then he would give her the silent treatment for days. During breakups, Rumsey told Franchetti he was suicidal, she said.
When she was six weeks pregnant, Franchetti issued an ultimatum: Rumsey needed to get help, or she was done with the relationship. He refused.
Kyra was born April 4, 2014. Within 72 hours, Rumsey had allegedly called his girlfriend a “whore,” claiming the child might not be his.
Several months later, Rumsey filed a petition seeking custody of Kyra, who by then was living on Long Island with Franchetti. She believes the custody claim was primarily about Rumsey exerting power over a mother who refused to be in a romantic relationship.
After Franchetti took Kyra to a “Mommy and Me” class, the director of the business relayed that Rumsey had been there, quietly taking photos. Franchetti had never told Rumsey about the class, suggesting he had followed them.
Peterson, the judge, was dismissive when Franchetti’s stalking allegations were raised in court. “These are just allegations,” she said in court. “I don’t want either of you following the other.”
While Peterson took an aggressive tone with the parents, scolding them to “grow up” and reach a settlement, her official actions in the case were not controversial: Rumsey’s unsupervised visitations with Kyra had been agreed to by Franchetti, while the mother awaited a trial in which she would seek sole custody.
When a custody trial appears inevitable, Family Court judges often agree to appoint forensic evaluators. If the evaluator issues an opinion about whom should get custody, the judge almost without exception goes along.
In Franchetti’s case, both sides mutually agreed upon using Dr. Larry Cohen, a New York City-based psychologist, whom the parents collectively paid about $14,000.
The work is not only expensive, but secretive. Even today, because of a state law imposing strict confidentiality, Franchetti says she cannot share most
of the details of Cohen’s evaluation. Only Franchetti’s lawyer has been allowed to read a physical copy. The secrecy, which is based on privacy concerns, means there can be little accountability if an evaluator’s work is routinely flawed. Cohen told the Times Union he is strictly prohibited from commenting on patients’ cases.
During the evaluation process, Franchetti said, she would “cry after almost every meeting” with Cohen. She was cut off when trying to elaborate on allegations and “forced into ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers.”
Before recommending joint custody, Cohen interviewed Kyra’s pediatrician, parents and baby sitter. He did not interview anyone on Rumsey’s side, Franchetti said.
Robin Lynch, who chairs the New York
State Psychological Association’s child custody evaluation committee, said Cohen should have interviewed more collateral witnesses, including people with knowledge of Rumsey’s past. “You would want much more detailed information,” Lynch said.
Forensic evaluations are often flawed, Lynch said, because evaluators rely too much on their gut instincts.
“I think we have to think of a pilot who must rely on their instruments — not their intuition — when they are in the deepest fog,” Lynch said. “There’s a lot going on in a child custody evaluation. It has to be systematic and methodical.”
Yet in New York, there are no state-issued criteria for writing forensic evaluation reports beyond considering a child’s “best psychological interests and well-being.”
In a case not involving a child death, a mother’s decision to drink iced
“I think we have to think of a pilot who must rely on their instruments — not their intuition — when they are in the deepest fog. There’s a lot going on in a child custody evaluation. It has to be systematic and methodical.” — Robin Lynch, chairwoman for the New York State Psychological Association’s child custody evaluation committee
coffee during cold weather was cited as “proof of poor judgment” in an evaluation, according to Meredith Lee Price, senior supervising attorney at Safe Horizon, a nonprofit that provides legal services to domestic violence victims in New York. In this case, the forensic evaluator’s opinion gave no weight, she said, to “credible allegations” that the father had sexually assaulted the mother while the child was present in the home.
In 2011, Dr. Daniel Saunders of the University of Michigan School of Social Work issued a study finding that evaluators estimated up to a third of child abuse allegations were false, when research showed abuse false allegations in divorce cases at vastly lower rates.
In downstate New York courts, forensic evaluators are required to be a psychologist, psychiatrist or social worker. The courts maintain a list of those deemed qualified and require six hours of training. In the rest of the state, there is no public list and no required training. Few evaluators in New York are trained to recognize the behaviors that stem from trauma, abuse and addiction, Lynch said.
There are also no enforceable standards by which evaluators must conduct interviews examining accusations, including whether to interview a child while the allegedly abusive parent is present.
Joshua Hanson, associate executive director at The Safe Center LI, an organization that assists child abuse victims, recalled a case in which the forensic evaluator conducted an interview on the bed where sexual abuse allegedly occurred.
Another important actor in Family Court cases is the attorney appointed to look out for the child’s interests. If those attorneys operate effectively, they can provide an informed and unbiased perspective in a timely manner.
Franchetti repeatedly asked Kyra’s attorney, Glen Cacchioli, to get more involved. During the entirety of the case, he met with Kyra at Franchetti’s house a single time.
“There were so many times I begged him to talk to my parents, to talk to the baby sitter who had significant interactions with (Rumsey),” Franchetti said. “So that it’s not just me he’s hearing it from, that things are wrong. He refused.”
Cacchioli did not respond to a request for comment.
In another child death case, the alleged February murder of 6-year-old Davonte Paul in Troy, his father, Freeston Paul, said that over the course of four years in Ulster Family Court, Kingston attorney Jason Lesko met Davonte only once.
Lesko never sought more information about the father’s allegations that Kevin Cox, the live-in boyfriend of the boy’s mother, was abusive, Paul said. On April 30, Cox pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder for allegedly exposing Davonte to freezing temperatures for a lengthy period before he died. Lesko did not respond to a request for comment.
According to guidelines issued by the New York State Bar Association, regardless of a child’s age, their attorney should be meeting with them regularly — prior to court hearings and when apprised of emergencies or significant events. They should interview adults with knowledge of the child’s life, such as relatives, school personnel, child welfare workers and mental health professionals, the guidelines state.
But there are no clear governmental standards regulating the conduct. In 2007, the state Administrative Board of the Courts issued rules stating only that the attorneys should “advise the child regularly” and consult “all experts necessary” to conduct a full investigation.
Still, questions remain about whether some attorneys for children are
overburdened. The Office of Court Administration limits the number of child clients per attorney to 150.
In the case of Thomas Valva – who was allegedly being beaten by his father and forced to sleep in a freezing Long Island garage, where he died in January – the attorney for the child was criticized by Thomas’ mother in the years prior. The father, Michael Valva, a New York City police officer, and his girlfriend Angela Pollina have pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder charges.
In a March 2019 appearance in Suffolk County Family Court, Thomas’ mother, Justyna Zubkovalva, alleged that the attorney – legal aid lawyer Ethan Halpern – was doing “absolutely nothing, didn’t even visit kids at school.” Halpern’s office declined to comment.
Child Protective Services had also been getting complaints, possibly from staffers at the Valva boys’ Long Island school, alleging they were coming soaked in urine, malnourished, bruised and one with a black eye. The three Valva boys were in the care of their father at that time.
“In regard to the children, I have been to the house,” Halpern replied during the March 2019 court appearance. “I’ve seen medical records from the latest pediatrician. As far as I can tell, everything is going according to what would be normal.”
How Halpern and others came to view Michael Valva in a more positive light than his estranged wife, despite the disturbing abuse allegations, may be rooted in a controversial concept that can impact the credibility battle.
In the absence of rigorous investigation of abuse allegations, according to advocates for female
domestic violence victims, a common counter argument puts battered women at risk of losing custody of children to abusers.
That Family Court scenario often entails one litigant — typically the father — being accused of abuse, but arguing that the accuser — typically the mother — is trying to damage a child’s relationship with the accused though psychological manipulation, including making false allegations.
In the Valva case, both sides argued the other was engaging in the “parental alienation” tactic to gain advantage in the custody battle.
Michael Valva alleged the mother of their three boys had created “rehearsed” video recordings in which the children would say they did not like visiting their father. The mother told the children “not to love” their father, he alleged. And Valva, who is now accused of beating his son before he froze to death, had alleged it was the mother leaving bruises on the boys.
In an interview with Suffolk County Child Protective Services worker Michele Clark at school in late 2017, Thomas Valva, who was 6 and autistic, and his brother Anthony, who was 8 and suspected of being on the spectrum, relayed that their mother was not abusive, according to court records.
But over the following months, their stories changed: Both boys said their mother was physically abusive and made them say false statements about their father on video.
Zubko-valva, who denied the allegations, was disbelieved by certain key officials – despite evidence that Michael Valva was engaging in the very behavior he was alleging.
In 2016, Zubko-valva on several occasions put recording devices in the children’s backpacks when they visited their father. The recordings allegedly captured audio indicating Michael Valva and Pollina urged the children to repeat phrases such as “mommy is mean,” “mommy don’t hit me,” and “I don’t what to stay with mommy.”
Clark, the CPS official, listened to the mother’s tapes in December 2017. But CPS pursued a neglect claim against Zubko-valva anyway, and as a result, the mother was not allowed to see her three children after early 2018.
During a hearing on the neglect allegation, Halpern, the attorney for the children, vacillated about whether the father’s allegations were true. But he supported a neglect finding against Zubko-valva, determining the mother “disliked the father so much that it would have an effect on the emotional well-being of the children,” according to Suffolk Family Court Judge Bernard Cheng’s ruling.
Cheng’s April 2019 decision, issued more than a year after the neglect claim was filed, flagged many inconsistencies in Michael Valva’s allegations and CPS’ methodology, noting that Clark never saw physical evidence corroborating that the mother was abusive. He questioned whether the children had been “coached or manipulated” to make the allegations by their father. He noted that Thomas initially told Clark his mother was not abusive, but then changed his story when interviewed at his father’s house.
Yet even after Cheng’s ruling exonerated the mother, the children remained in the care of Michael Valva until after Thomas froze to death.
In Family Court, there has been decades-long furor over the concept of parental alienation. While the theory that it’s a “syndrome” has been largely discredited, judges continue to emphasize the importance of a parent fostering a child’s relationship with the other parent.
While some parents seek to poison their child’s relationship with another parent, advocates for domestic violence victims argue that should not regularly outweigh abuse allegations.
Joan Meier, a law professor at George Washington University, in January published a study that examined the outcomes of nearly 4,400 custody cases across the country.
When mothers alleged any type of abuse, and fathers responded by claiming parental alienation, the study found, mothers were twice as likely to lose custody than when fathers did not claim an alienation defense.
Hanson, the associate executive director at The Safe Center
LI, said true cases of parental alienation are rare, and when they do occur, are most likely to be committed by someone who is engaging in the practice, as may have occurred in the Valva case.
Still, parental alienation has become an effective tool for attorneys whose clients have been accused of abuse, Hanson said.
“If something succeeds in court, then people are going to do it over and over and over again,” he said. “There are definitely attorneys that use it regularly.”
Zubko-valva, a New York City correction officer, chose to be her own lawyer in her complicated case, and her zealous advocacy for her children deeply annoyed judges and other court officials. They had far less friction with Michael Valva.
Hannah, the Siena psychologist, said it’s common for abuse victims to appear as the lesscollected parent in Family Court cases. That perception alone can swing outcomes.
“She’s being truthful, but she looks ragged, she sounds paranoid. It is a function of being abused in her partnership, and about protecting her children,” Hannah said. “She’s the one making claims that no one wants to believe.”