Quotes from the above OP article:
Rochlin said Fotis should have
unsupervised visitation rights [BBM]. He added that any re-introduction of Fotis to his kids would be handled with sensitivity.
“Certainly, we would be open to consulting a child psychologist,” he said.
“Exposing them to their father, someone who makes up half of who they are. I can't imagine that that, in any way, should be prohibited simply because it would be a difficult thing for the children.”[BBM]
Rochlin told FOX61 that as part of an order, he may also seek access to the children on behalf of Fotis' sister Rena Dulos. She is the aunt of the children who has also not been allowed to see them. [BBM]
RE: Unsupervised Visitation Rights
Question: Why and on What Basis is this Request even worthy of Court time and expense?
Fd only very briefly had unsupervised visitation rights at the beginning of the divorce action and this was quickly removed by Judge Heller/Family Court for cause. The file on this topic is long and deep and so the request for unsupervised visitation seems delusional at best and simply a waste of the courts time to discuss given the well documented history in place that resulted in fully supervised visitation that was in place at time of JFd disappearance. As others have said, "Fd worked LONG and HARD and BRILLIANTLY" for the status of FULLY SUPERVISED VISITATION WITH HIS 5 CHILDREN!
Fd prior to JFd disappearance had strictly supervised visitation, strict visitation schedule, and supervised phone calls and communication with his children. All these protocols were put in place after consultation with multiple experts, including psychologists for the children. I was going to add that these protocols were done with the approval of the GAL but given the history of GAL Meehan in this case (and both sides of attys calling for his removal simultaneously), I'm not sure what value if any GAL Meehan provides to the overall situation, particularly given his role in allegedly sharing a copy of the draft psych report with Fd former atty (which was against Court rules).
I realise the wild and wooly world of Pattisville is a strange one but is Pattisville now seeking to 'reinvent history' by making a claim for unsupervised visitation? Are we seeing divine intervention happen in real life and Fd has been struck and reinvented in the minds of Pattisville as a bona fide 'loving' father? My guess is that Pattisville simply thinks the Courts and the Public will have forgotten that Fd never really had unsupervised access to his children, or perhaps more likely Atty Rochlin picked up the wrong file on his desk that might have referred to 'some other father' other than Fd and was dealing with someone else entirely in his motion to the Court!
Fd 'at best' has a questionable and poor track record as a father per the Family Court documents. Judge Heller labeled Fd a 'liar' in her Court and a 'deadbeat dad' in her motion giving temporary custody to GF as he provided $0 to provide for the health and well being of his children since JFd left 4Jx.
The present shift of Pattisville activities to Family Court and Custody isn't surprising IMO as now that the Civil Court isn't really available as an avenue to torture and torment GF and the 5 Dulos children they have to work with what is available and that now seems to be Juvenile Court.
I do wonder which Judge will draw the 'short straw' to take up the 5th ring show in the Pattisville Circus? I am sure we will sadly soon find out.
I'm not sure how anyone (even a narcopath) can describe themselves as a 'loving father' and at the same time subject their children to the process of what Fd and Pattisville seems to be legally contemplating?
This quote is a loaded doozie as well IMO:
“Certainly, we would be open to consulting a child psychologist,” he said.
“Exposing them to their father, someone who makes up half of who they are. I can't imagine that that, in any way, should be prohibited simply because it would be a difficult thing for the children.”[BBM]
Does anyone believe that GF and her atty's are prohibiting access to the 5 Dulos children, "...simply because it would be a difficult thing for the children"???????
Sure access to the children by Fd and "Freek Family" would be difficult (better word is probably awkward) but frankly based on the Family Court files the fact that the situation would be difficult/awkward is the very least of the GF issues being faced in this tragic situation. GF has dealt with "difficult issues" starting with the disappearance and presumed murder of her daughter at the hands of MT and Fd and done so with dignity and grace IMO. GF hasn't run from anything difficult with regards to the children and instead has faced a whole slew of 'difficult' issues with all five children starting on 5/24/19 IMO.
Fd and the "Freek Family" having access to the children has IMO zero to do with it being difficult and everything to do with it simply being a bad idea when the concept of the welfare of the children is considered. I know the concept of the well being of the children might perhaps be 'foreign' to Fd and the "Freek Family" but perhaps if they gave it a few moments of thought that they just might/maybe/perhaps understand that until the issue of their bio dad and his mistress possibly being involved in the murder of their beloved mother is resolved that it would be better for all involved? Or, better yet and given that Fd has proven incapable of thinking about anyone other than himself and his interests, why not find a QUALIFIED child psychologist and perhaps ask them for their POV? I would love to see which expert Pattisville drums up to explain how Fd having access to his 5 children is a good idea, when his status of being a murderer is undefined at present. I am sure the credentials of this 'expert' will be mind blowing to all of us following this case!
I know that putting the emotional well being of someone else before his own might not be doable for Fd and most likely the "Freek Family" as well, but surely there has to be someone in Pattisville that might be able to explain to Fd why its not exactly the 'best time' to pursue access. I know delusional behaviour is running rampant in Pattisville and Atty Rochlin seems to have picked up the wrong client file when he made his request for unsupervised access but this issue really isn't that hard to figure out when you are dealing with minor children who still don't really know where there mother is and whether their father and his mistress murdered her or had something to do with her disappearance. Not hard to see this at all IMO.
Tragic that 5 young children are being used as pawns in a larger money driven chess match by Fd and the "Freek Family".
IMO its shameful behaviour by people that who claim to 'love' the children are doing anything but 'love' them.
MOO