Trancscript Song v Moore 2-20-15 (1)

7/25/2019 Trancscript Song v Moore 2-20-15 (1)

1/32

1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF OAKLAND

LILLIAN SONG,

Plaintiff,v Case No. 2012-803495-DMWILLIAM MOORE,

Defendant./

EMERGENCY MOTION HEARING

BEFORE THE HONORABLE LISA LANGTON

Pontiac, Michigan - Friday, February 20, 2015

APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiff: VINCENT D. GIOVANNI (P26442)26111 West 14 Mile Road, Suite 201Franklin, Michigan 48025-1171(248) [email protected]

For the Defendant: EMILY E. LONG (P69607)Long Law, PLLC

3910 Telegraph Road, Suite 200Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48302-1461(248) [email protected]

Guardian Ad Litem: KERI MIDDLEDITCH WIGOD (P63088)Alexander Eisenberg Middleditch &Spilman, PLLC600 South Adams Road, Suite 100Birmingham, Michigan 48009-6862(248) 358-8880

[email protected]

Transcript Provided by: Accurate Transcription Services, LLCFirm # 8493(734)944-5818

Transcribed by: Krista S. Michels, CER #8490
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/32

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAG

WITNESSES

None

EXHIBITS RECEIVED

None offered.


3/32

3

Pontiac, Michigan1

Friday, February 20, 2015 - 2:33 p.m.2

* * * * * *3

THE CLERK: All rise. Oakland County Circuit4

Court is now in session, the Honorable Judge Lisa Langton5

presiding. Calling Moore v Moore, case number 2012-6

803495-DM.7

MS. LONG: Good afternoon, your Honor, Emily8

Long on behalf of Mr. Moore, who is present to my left.9

MR. GIOVANNI: Good afternoon, your Honor,10

Vincent Giovanni on behalf of Lillian Song, formerly11

Lillian Song-Moore, who is seated to my right.12

THE COURT: Okay.13

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Good afternoon, your Honor,14

Keri Middleditch, Guardian Ad Litem for the minor child.15

THE COURT: Okay. Were here on an emergency16

motion to suspend plaintiff mothers parenting time. Ms.17

Long?18

MS. LONG: Yes, your Honor; may I proceed?19

THE COURT: Yes.20

MS. LONG: Judge, I did file an emergency21

motion. It was drafted today. I apologize to the Court22

somewhat for my casual appearance. I tried to give23

defense coun--or plaintiffs counsel as well as the GAL as24

much notice as possible. I spoke with both of them via25


4/32

4

telephone this morning.1

The basis of our motion is principally, the2

exhibits that were admitted at the beginning of plaintiff3

mothers proofs in the hearing that the Court has4

continuing before it in the custody matter. I just5

received an actual copy of those, Judge. I had not6

received a copy of those prior to them being admitted. I-7

-we had some limited voir dire.8

I have not had the opportunity to cross-examine9

on them. Mr. Giovanni laid the foundation and its based10

upon my notes and recollection of Ms. Songs testimony11

that I made the factual allegations that I did.12

Specifically--13

MR. GIOVANNI: May I interrupt for one second,14

Judge? Have you read the pleadings?15

THE COURT: Ive read both the pleadings, yes.16

MR. GIOVANNI: Okay. So, I just want to pro--17

proceed from that understanding.18

THE COURT: Yes.19

MR. GIOVANNI: Thats all.20

THE COURT: Yes, I did.21

MS. LONG: Specifically Judge, my recollection22

of Ms. Songs testimony, because I--and I remember23

specifically asking this because I was so concerned about24

the actual content of the photographs, was how long have25


5/32

5

these photographs been going on? And I believe the date1

of the first photograph that Mr. Giovanni had entered had2

a 2013 in front of it. And Ms. Songs testimony was that3

she was photographing the rectal/anal region of the minor4

child in question, Joshua Moore, when he was received from5

fathers care and then, when he was again, delivered to6

fathers care.7

The thrust of that, your Honor, was that there8

was some sort of injury or otherwise that Ms. Song was9

attempting to document that was worsening in my clients10

care as opposed to in her care. The concern I have,11

beyond simply the graphicness of the photograph, is that12

based on that, and some of these photographs, as Im13

looking through, you literally see a hand. You see14

fingers that are--that are spreading apart the young15

childs bottom.16

Taking that testimony as true that this child17

was being photographed on that frequent of a basis, from18

2013 until today, even if you assume for the sake of19

argument that it didnt happen every single time, we are20

talking about an extraordinary number of photographs of21

this childs rectum. And I spoke--I had the opportunity,22

I can say as an officer of the Court, I forwarded a copy23

of the email to Mr. Giovanni, as well as Ms. Middleditch.24

The pediatrician who testified, Dr. Forman, I25


6/32

6

spoke with him via telephone today and asked him whether1

or not he had the opportunity to ever review such2

photographs.3

MR. GIOVANNI: Object to any conclusions or4

statements he might have made to counsel.5

MS. LONG: Well, I can--I can--or Judge, then6

Id ask the Court to query of the doctor. I certainly7

didnt have time to get an affidavit from him today. I8

can state as an officer of the Court what he told me, or9

Id ask the Court to telephone him. He did provide his10

contact information and asked that he--his staff be11

instructed to pull him out of a room if the Court would12

prefer to hear it from him.13

But irrespective, I think the content of these14

photographs speaks for itself in conjunction with Ms.15

Songs testimony. This is something that was not reported16

to the GAL. It was not reported to CPS despite multiple17

investigations. It was not handled by a doctor and it18

does not appear to have been--have been handled by any19

professional whatsoever and this is a situation where we20

have multiple photographs of a young boys bottom.21

And hes not just an infant, Judge. This isnt22

a circumstance where hes an--an infant whos subject to23

the type of disastrous diapers that we can all relate to.24

This is a little boy who is going to be five years old25


7/32

7

soon and is on multiple times per week being photographed1

rectally by his mother. I think its completely2

inappropriate. I think its abusive and I think that it3

needs to stop. I recognize that Mr. Giovanni offered in4

his response of pleading that there was an offer that--5

that Ms. Song would refuse or would discontinue doing this6

until the Court reached a decision on the pending motion.7

I dont believe thats satisfactory.8

Ms. Song has demonstrated historically not--some9

noncompliance with Court orders. The Court certainly has10

enough testimony before it now at this point to recognize11

that some of the delays that have been attributed to other12

facets of the motion thats pending before the Court is as13

a result of Ms. Song not utilizing the safety net that the14

consent judgment of divorce put in place to protect this15

child, specifically Ms. Middleditch.16

The fact that Ms. Middleditch was not aware of17

any of this is again, of utmost concern. Even if she18

wasnt going to tell the doctor, even if she wasnt going19

to tell CPS, the childs representative should have been20

aware of these concerns. If she was concerned enough to21

be taking these photographs, these concerns should have22

been voiced to professionals. And in the absence of23

voicing this to professionals, in the absence of the24

people who this should be reported to being--having it25


8/32

8

been reported to, I think that that belies any assertion1

that this was done for a legitimate purpose and because of2

that, I believe the safety of the child is at issue.3

I believe it is harmful to be photographed4

repeatedly in this sense and the Exhibit A that we5

attached to our pleading demonstrates that literally after6

Court, after we were here on Wednesday, Ms. Song exercised7

her evening parenting time that was designed in the8

consent judgment for them to be able to have dinner9

together and that a rectal exam of some sort was10

performed. Whether it was photographed, I dont know, but11

she did communicate that in writing to my client that--12

evidencing that it was again, examined on Wednesday just13

hours after Court.14

And for those reasons, Id ask the Court to15

grant my motion pending ultimate disposition. Were in16

Court next Friday on this issue.17

THE COURT: Okay, thank you. Mr. Giovanni?18

MR. GIOVANNI: Your Honor, I think that counsel19

has mischaracterized, not only what was done, but the20

nature of what was done. There is nothing wrong with21

photographing this child to document a medical condition.22

If she had published these to someone else or shown them23

to someone else, thats a different story. The mere24

existence of the photographs is only for the purpose of25


9/32

9

showing that the child was not being properly treated and1

being neglected.2

Now what Ms. Moore--or Ms. Song should have done3

in terms of notifying others, you might want to recall4

that she had notified others about injuries the child had5

suffered because she was concerned about possible6

infliction of injuries by her husband. She didnt accuse7

him of that, but she made the authorities aware of that.8

That was a--those are potentially abuse allegations and in9

fact, they were investigated.10

Now, this problem that were dealing with here11

that exemplified by these pictures is a less serious issue12

because its a matter of neglect. And the fact that she13

couldnt get responses from the authorities because it14

didnt seem to, apparently to them, exhibit abuse, would15

suggest that, I would think that the responsiveness of--of16

the authorities would be significantly less in a neglect17

situation.18

Now, you have to remember, I think, and take19

this--an argument throughout this case, that this case has20

to be seen in the context and in my--my answer to my21

motion, my client has been communicating with Mr. Moore.22

And there have been communications which, I havent23

reviewed everything possible because a limited amount of24

time, but I have discussions in Our Family Wizard where25


10/32

10

she was bringing to his attention the fact that the child1

was constantly sore and red after he had--red after he has2

been with you in this location.3

I have emails between the two parties on August4

10thof last year, on Aug--August 9thof last year, August5

8thof last year, September 22nd, September 21, September 26

of last year, September 20, September 19, February 19 of7

this year. And the responses she got, basically from Mr.8

Moore, was the problem is potty training and Im going to9

take care of this problem with the application of10

ointments and salves, like A&D, as he--as he said, but11

he--but he--he didnt address the problem when she pointed12

it out to him appropriately.13

The problem kept on happening and in fact, when14

he said he was giving him the A&D ointment, the problem15

still continued to appear. My client has been threatened16

numerous times during the course of the marriage that--17

during the course of the pendency of the divorce that he18

would make her pay for having divorced him. She was un--19

in a situation where she anticipated there would be future20

litigation over events relating to this child and she21

predicted that pretty well.22

These photographs are not published to anyone23

else. They are photographs of--of neglectful treatment.24

They are relevant to this litigation. I think--I--in25


11/32

11

fact, I viewed their protestations as deflecting the fact1

that they clearly illustrate neglect on the part of Mr.2

Moore. I--if I, you know, if I had known about these in3

advance, I probably would have said, You should call4

Middleditch or--or deal with it with Dr. Glickman (ph),5

but I think you--my client indicated that she ad--6

addressed this issue with Dr. Glickman; is that correct?7

MS. SONG: Two peds.8

THE COURT: (Indiscernible).9

MR. GIOVANNI: Okay. So, there--there is10

nothing neglectful, abusive, repulsive, disgusting about11

these photographs except that they illustrate neglect.12

And your Honor, theyre appropriate to the circumstances13

of this case. They are in response to Mr. Moore not14

treating the complaints of my client correctly. And I15

would ask you to review these emails before you make a16

ruling so you can see that there was discussion between17

the parties about this problem and in spite of those18

discussions, it kept on reoccurring.19

My client has noticed in several instances in20

the past related to this child that Mr. Moore lacks21

empathy, which he will testify to on Friday next, and it22

hasnt been put on the record yet. She has always been23

concerned about his ability to deal with the child in--in24

light of his phobias and delusions, also about his lack of25


12/32

12

empathy for the child. These instances were a concern for1

her from the very beginning. Hes been unresponsive. The2

problem keeps reoccurring.3

Its extremely critical to this litigation. The4

fact that we have photographs is not inappropriate and my5

client would also testify, if we take any testimony today,6

that these pictures were only taken in conjunction with7

the necessity of treating this child. They were not taken8

in the sense that, Okay, its time to pull your pants9

down, were going to take your pictures. She took these10

pictures and--and also, in--they took these pictures in11

conjunction with applying palliative treatments to the12

injury this child had suffered from the rash.13

This child came back from parenting time14

complaining of soreness and rawness in his bottom. She15

also would testify that she made efforts to avoid--16

MS. LONG: Judge, Im going to make the same17

objection. Counsel didnt want an offer of proof from me18

and I--I mean, this is beyond an offer of proof, so--19

MR. GIOVANNI: Well, excuse me. The doctor is20

not here, my client is. All right? Im sorry, your21

Honor. She made efforts to make sure the child didnt22

even know these pictures were being taken by deafening--23

theres a way you can turn off--24

THE COURT: How do we ever know that, so--25


13/32


14/32

14

MR. GIOVANNI: Okay, your Honor.1

THE COURT: Okay, thank you. Any--2

MS. LONG: I have some response. I dont know3

if the Court wants to hear from the GAL first?4

THE COURT: Ill--Ill hear your response and5

then, Ill hear the GALs.6

MS. LONG: Judge, I--I think that one of the7

concluding things that Mr. Giovanni said is the most8

important and the most--well, its the most important9

because he said its--it was only associated with the10

necessity of treating the child. It absolutely was not.11

This had nothing to do with treating the child. We heard12

from the pediatrician.13

There was no testimony elicited by Mr. Giovanni,14

who certainly had the opportunity to do so, to discuss15

when we were talking sub--for a substantial period of time16

with Dr. Forman about potty training and it being an17

issue, there was no question, there was absolutely no18

question posed by Mr. Giovanni to Dr. Forman regarding Ms.19

Songs continued complaints regarding diaper rash. There20

was absolutely no question posed by counsel to CPS.21

These people, and I be--its--its--its my22

belief, based upon that, Judge, that this has never been23

brought to anyone elses attention. And I believe that24

because to my knowledge, having been rep--having25


15/32

15

represented for my client--my client as long as I have,1

that I believe, based on my experience, that a 3200 would2

have had to have been filed. And to my knowledge, that3

has not been done. I believe that Dr. Forman would4

represent that to the Court and--and I think it is--its5

simply a function of the obligation of a mandatory report,6

if faced with these type of photographs.7

I do not know how a child of this age, were not8

talking about an infant. I dont know how a little boy of9

four years old cant tell that a photograph is being taken10

of his bottom when his mothers hand, 2-12-15, I assume11

thats his mothers hand that is completely over his12

bottom spreading his--his rear end apart. I dontknow13

how its possible that you can honestly say that that14

would be taken without the childs knowledge.15

THE COURT: Ms. Middleditch?16

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: I would like the record to17

reflect that I have not been provided these photographs,18

nor have I seen these photographs. These photographs were19

brought to my attention via Mr. Moore and his counsel20

after the testimony came out of Ms. Song in my absence21

after the testimony that I provided to the Court.22

I would indicate at no time did mother raise any23

concerns about a habitual rash or rectal irritation during24

my tenure on the case. At no time did she bring some25


16/32

16

concerns to me that she felt that something was happening1

to Joshua while in his fathers carewith respect to his2

bottom or rear end. I frankly think that if the pictures,3

as are described by both attorneys, have been taken as4

often as they seem to suggest, certainly even after a5

dinner, which is absurd to me, find--I find that that6

actual action is very abusive.7

When I previously testified before the Court,8

none of this had been brought to my attention. Frankly,9

CPS has been involved twice since my tenure on the case.10

This was never brought to Child Protective Services11

attention. If there was any real concern, I cant imagine12

that mother didnt come to me and voice these concerns to13

me. I--I think this is actually reprehensible and I--Im14

concerned that mother doesnt recognize the magnitude of15

her actions on this child.16

Had I known this, I would not have made the17

recommendation I did previously with regard to maintaining18

the equal parenting time arrangement. I--I am concerned19

enough given the email that I received from Mr. Moore20

articulating the email he received from Lillian after the21

Wednesday parenting time that I want to forward that email22

on to Dr. Margerum, Lillian Songs therapist. Im23

concerned that she doesnt recognize the gravity of her24

actions in my view, or the impact on her child and at this25


17/32

17

time, Im recommending supervisedparenting time.1

THE COURT: Okay. Does anyone have any2

questions of the GAL?3

MS. LONG: I do not, your Honor.4

THE COURT: Mr. Giovanni, any questions?5

MR. GIOVANNI: Ms. Middleditch, I have a6

question or two.7

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Sure.8

MR. GIOVANNI: I do think at--I do understand9

the pos--is it your position that its a problem for you10

that you werent acquainted with this problem before11

today; thats correct, right?12

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Yeah, I--I--I, not only me,13

but not--Child Protective Services, the pediatrician, any-14

-anyone that would have been able to assist this child15

outside of either party.16

MR. GIOVANNI: All right. So, my client has--17

has produced photographs, which are detailed photographs18

of the childs bottom.19

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Okay.20

MR. GIOVANNI: Theres a series of photographs,21

I believe there are 20? Less than 20, where Ms. Song took22

photographs of severe--in my view, severe rashes on the23

childs bottom, which she testified occurred at the time24

that the child arrived from his fathers parenting time,25


18/32

18

all right?1

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Okay.2

THE COURT: I think she testified that they3

arrived from when she picked the child up from school and-4

-5

MR. GIOVANNI: Yeah, when the pa--at--at the6

conclu--7

THE COURT: --no, not directly from father.8

MR. GIOVANNI: Right. At the conclusion of9

parenting time, the child showed up--at the conclusion of10

the fathers parenting time, her testimony is the child11

showed up with these bad rashes. And all the--all the12

initial pictures, for purposes of your consideration, show13

rashes; does everybody agree with that? Would the Court14

agree that they show rashes?15

THE COURT: Some of it.16

MS. LONG: I--I just--I dont--I havent had a17

chance to read this. This is the first time Ive gotten a18

copy.19

THE COURT: Well, just ask your questions.20

MR. GIOVANNI: All right. So, they all sh--21

well, all the--the initial pictures show rashes and22

subsequent pictures at the conclusion of her parenting23

time show amelioration of--or disappearance of the rashes.24

So my question to you is, how would you suppose that a25


19/32

19

person such as Lillian, who was concerned about neglect by1

the father, how would she document such neglect other than2

by taking pictures?3

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Well frankly, had she talked4

to me, I would have advised her to take the child to the5

pediatrician to have someone independently review that. I6

dont think you photograph a child multiple times, how7

many times is not clear to me, but its obvious at least8

20. By everybodys account theres at least--or9

approximately 20 photographs, but if theres some sort of10

severe rash and it keep reoccurring, which is not so11

typical on a four-year-old child, and this is not a child12

in diapers, theres already been some information from13

both myself and Im sure the parents have heard this from14

the school directly or his daycare thats hes having some15

potty training problems.16

I am no expert, but it seems to me that this17

regression in potty training where he would not, to quote18

what the school told me, he would not make a poop on the19

potty at school. And then, I hear that mother has been20

inspecting his anal area, sounds like on a weekly basis21

for quite some time and--and photographing it, I think22

could have contributed to that. Again, Im no expert, but23

my proposal would have been if she were seeing this and it24

were a chronic problem, I would have thought she would25


20/32

20

have sought out advice of a pediatrician and brought it to1

the GALs attention. And if she thought there was some2

inappropriate or abusive behavior going on by father, she3

was cal--had contacted CPS previously, she would do that4

again or law enforcement.5

MR. GIOVANNI: Does it matter to you that my6

clientsposition today and in her answer to the motion7

and testimony she was offering any; is that--the pictures8

only occurred in conjunction with necessary treatment of a9

child complaining of a severe pain in the bottom because10

of the rash?11

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Im not sure I understand your12

question.13

MR. GIOVANNI: In other words, the pictures14

werent taken by themselves. Herposition is the pictures15

were only taken in conjunction with the treatment of the16

rash?17

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: And so, my position, I guess18

as the Guardian Ad Litem, is if there was something19

medically necessary; why didnt she get the assistance of20

a pediatrician to take a look at this kid and document21

this chronic problem and not take a picture and check it22

every three weeks, but to go to a pediatrician? Or every,23

you know, three times a week, excuse me, and go to a24

pediatrician and have that independent evaluation done?25


21/32

21

MR. GIOVANNI: Well, you understand a1

pediatrician, the--the parties both had a belief as to why2

this was occurring and in fact, the belief is a reasonable3

belief based upon the idea that the child is defecating in4

his pants and the condition was likely a result of that.5

So, its not like theres any, shall we say mystery, about6

how this is occurring?7

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Okay. Then, if she thinks8

that the child is being neglected in Mr. Moores care,9

then she needs to document that by doing the pediatrician.10

Otherwise, they need to be using their A&D or Desitin or11

whatever ointment or cream, whats prescribed and move on.12

I dont think we look at the childs anus after every13

parenting time exchange or the day that theyre exchanged14

and take photographs. Thats not the remedy. And in15

fact, I--I think could have actually been very harmful to16

Joshua. It certainly didnt help.17

MR. GIOVANNI: What about if Joshua is not aware18

of it?19

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Theres--I--I dont know that20

Joshua is aware of it or not. I--I didnt know, so I21

didnt talk to him about this, but I would be hard pressed22

to believe that a child whos getting ready to go to23

kindergarten and doing well by all accounts at the daycare24

would be unaware of it. Certainly, hes aware that25


22/32

22

someones inspecting his anal area multiple times a week,1

which is not normal.2

MR. GIOVANNI: But we have a--we have a--an3

acknowledged problem between both parties and that is a4

recurring rash caused by lack of potty training, okay? We5

have the parties discussing it with each other and both of6

them agreeing that A&D ointment is the appropriate7

treatment, correct?8

And lastly, we have my client testifying that9

its a recurring problem after the fathers parenting10

time, which she has documented with photographs. Now, she11

has--she is indicating that she has made efforts to make12

sure the child doesnt know these photographs are being13

taken, including silencing the--the cameras clicking14

noise. And in light of all that, with an acknowledged15

recurrent problem, Im not understanding why you would16

recommend that she have supervised parenting time,17

assuming that she would agree to take no further pictures?18

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Because I think that she19

should have recognized that that was problematic behavior20

to begin with and--and short of him blindfolding him and21

putting earphones in so they couldnt see or hear what was22

going on, I just dont think its plausible to believe he23

didnt know this was happening.24

And its not just the photographs. The fact25


23/32

23

that she was literally checking him, even after a three-1

hour visit with Mr. Moore is very disturbing because my2

understanding is, based on what everyone is saying, is3

this has been going on for over a year.4

MR. GIOVANNI: Well, you sa--well, I understand5

youre still--I completely understand your position about6

her not reporting it to others, but why is it disturbing7

for her to be--be checking the child if the child is8

repeatedly coming back from the fathers visitation with a9

sore behind and--10

THE COURT: I--I think shes answered that a11

couple times.12

MR. GIOVANNI: --and repeatedly complaining13

about it?14

THE COURT: Were just asking the same question15

over and over again.16

MR. GIOVANNI: Wait a second. Ms. Middleditch17

and the Court can--can preclude this if the Court chooses,18

but let me phrase the point.19

THE COURT: Okay.20

MR. GIOVANNI: The point, Ms. Middleditch, is21

that youve just testified that it was unusual that she22

would check the childs bottom and I posited to you that23

the child was complaining, the child was raw, it24

repeatedly kept happening. Why wouldnt she check his25


24/32

24

bottom? You said it was concerning that she did.1

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Why--why--why wouldnt she2

take him to the pediatrician?3

MR. GIOVANNI: Because--well, my--my--youre

4

acting like--5

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Why--why didnt she make6

another report to CPS? I mean, because clearly it seems7

to me the--the insinuation is she thought that either8

William was neglecting him or abusing him, one or the9

other.10

MR. GIOVANNI: Yes. You asked me why not report11

it and Im--my--my answer is, from my clients point of12

view, its a recurrent problem acknowledged by both13

parties with a causal relationship with not being potty14

trained and the parties agreed as to how it should be15

treated. The problem was it appeared that Mr. Moore was16

not treating it properly.17

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Well, or perhaps the problem18

was that mother was checking it so often and taking19

photographs that it caused additional anxiety to the child20

and it just exacerbated the potty training problem.21

MR. GIOVANNI: Well, thats speculation; is it22

not?23

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: No question, its speculation.24

MR. GIOVANNI: Yes.25


25/32

25

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: No question.1

MR. GIOVANNI: So if the--why isnt it--why is2

it not satisfactory in your mind of Ms. Moore is told by3

the Court this is inappropriate and shall not do it again4

and she agrees?5

MS. LONG: Objection, Judge. Thats been asked6

and answered.7

THE COURT: Right. Lets--do you have any more-8

-do you have any other questions?9

MR. GIOVANNI: Did I ask that question before?10

I--I dont believe I did.11

THE COURT: All right. Lets--all right.12

MR. GIOVANNI: Ms. Middleditch, just a last13

question. Youre recommending supervised parenting time14

and Im asking you why, if Lillian is told by the Court15

this is not appropriate in the Courts point of view and16

should not reoccur and she agrees, why is that not a17

satisfactory solution?18

MS. MIDDLEDITCH: Because I dont think she19

recognizes the--the--I think it was a poor judgment call20

and Im concerned that she wont continue to make poor21

judgment calls until we can address this with Dr. Margerum22

in her therapy.23

MR. GIOVANNI: All right, thank you.24

THE COURT: Anything further?25


26/32

26

MS. LONG: I dont have any questions based on1

that, Judge. Thank you.2

THE COURT: All right. Anything further?3

MR. GIOVANNI: No, your Honor. Well, unless you4

want to hear from my client under oath?5

THE COURT: I dont think so.6

MR. GIOVANNI: Accepting what we--we have said7

and as fact.8

THE COURT: I will accept what youve--youve9

indicated that she--her beliefs were as represented by10

her, okay?11

MR. GIOVANNI: And that what she did is a true12

fact, in terms of treating it, in terms of--of trying to13

avoid the child seeing it--14

THE COURT: Thats--if thats what--I--she15

doesnt need to get on the stand from--to say that because16

I believe she would just say that, so I do believe that.17

MR. GIOVANNI: Okay. Theres one more thing,18

Judge, I thought of that--Dr. Glickman, according to her,19

has advised her that if shes unable to bring the child in20

and theres an injury, a rash or something, that she21

should just photograph it and would document it and she22

could send it to him. So, she had some professional23

advice that photographing was appropriate and I want the24

Court to know that; is that correct, Ms. Moore--Ms. Song?25


27/32

27

MS. SONG: Yes.1

MR. GIOVANNI: All right. No--nothing further.2

MS. LONG: Judge, not to belabor the point, but3

I did, as an officer of the Court, represent what my4

communication was with Dr. Forman. Checked the medical5

records, who is the partner of Dr. Glickfield and he told6

me this would be reportable.7

THE COURT: Okay, I understand.8

MR. GIOVANNI: Judge, I--I--thats been thrown9

on the table, but I want to say that--10

THE COURT: Im going to--11

MR. GIOVANNI: --what Dr. Forman might say if he12

were here, might have to do with the severity of the rash13

being reported rather than the pictures themselves.14

THE COURT: Okay. Well, the--the first thing15

Im going to say is that I do find these pictures16

disturbing, so I didnt want to, when you handed them over17

to me yesterday, I wasnt going to look at them. I was18

very surprised that mom was taking these pictures. Youve19

indicated that she--that she took--only took them in--in20

conjunction with care and treatment.21

Well, theres several pictures of here where22

theres no rash and why would she take a picture then?23

All right, so I--I--Im not finding that a--24

MR. GIOVANNI: I can--I can answer that25


28/32

28

question, your Honor.1

THE COURT: No. Im--Im not--Im done with2

hearing from the parties. I dont believe they were taken3

in--just in view of--of treatment, I dont believe,

4

considering the age of the child, that he was completely5

unaware of this. As a parent and using my common sense,6

it--it is, and I think the GAL reflected this in her7

concerns, that knowing that the child has regressed now8

from potty training, it is not out of the realm of9

possibility that it could be because he is inspected every10

time he comes to his moms house and every time he leaves11

moms house in a way that, to me, just cannot be12

unavoidable that this child thinks is normal.13

Or if he does think its normal, it certainly14

could be a big reason why--exacerbate his stress over15

this. I think it is--I think it is an immediate threat to16

his emotional--that can cause him immediate emotional harm17

to this child. I--I also found it interesting in your18

pleadings that you indicated that plaintiff anticipated19

that she would be taken back to Court at some point by20

defendant in retaliation to the divorce; thus, plaintiff21

believed it was necessary to document the minor childs22

condition so that she could respond to anticipated23

accusation.24

This is completely for her protection, not in25


29/32

29

the best interests of the child. So, shes anticipating1

she might be accused of something so shes going to put2

this child through taking these pictures, which I didnt3

look at until right now. I am more than concerned that4

they were taken. I am more than concerned that they have5

been taken for some time. I am more than concerned that6

theyre sitting on her phone somewhere. Im concerned7

about that.8

If she felt that this child, you know, theres9

lots of protections in this case for Ms. Moore. She has a10

GAL. She--if she is concerned about that, and for11

whatever reason, she didnt want to go to CPS, she could12

have contacted the GAL. GAL would have been able to give13

her advice and counsel on how to proceed from that. The14

GAL is very versed in this and she was put into place so15

that Ms. Moore, Im sorry, Ms. Song would have a voice to16

speak to that wasnt her husband. And she has failed to17

do that.18

She did not raise--you know, we did have the19

pediatrician here. We did have the CPS workers here. We20

had our GAL here. Theyre all telling us, this is a21

surprise to them that mom is taking these pictures. I22

think there is an impact on this child. I am very23

concerned. I think it is more than--at best, it is very24

poor judgment in my opinion. It is, at best, very poor25


30/32

30

judgment.1

I am going to suspend parenting time until the2

completion of this trial. If she wants to set up3

supervised parenting time, she can work with the GAL to do4

that and whatever is satisfactory with respect to5

supervised parenting time--whatever is satisfactory to the6

GAL with respect to supervised parenting time, I will7

approve.8

I do not want the child to be told that he is9

not seeing his mom in the same--in the same manner. I10

dont want anything negative said about mom about why11

theres a change in this right now. Its--I mean, youll12

have to consult with the GAL as to best approach that, but13

I dont want any negative com--any negative comments to be14

heard by this child as to why were changing this.15

And I would counsel your client about where16

these pictures are and how theyre protected. I am not17

going to allow these pictures to be made part of the18

record. I dont want any additionalcopies made of these19

pictures. I would prefer that the pictures be only in the20

possession of counsel at this point and we will keep ours21

in possession of ours. And well continue with hearing22

next Friday. Does anyone have any--23

MS. LONG: Ill prepare an order, Judge.24

MR. GIOVANNI: May I approach with counsel?25


31/32


32/32

STATE OF MICHIGAN )

COUNTY OF OAKLAND )ss.

I certify that this transcript is a true and accuratetranscription to the best of my ability of the proceeding in

this case before the Honorable Lisa Langton, as recorded by the

clerk.

Proceedings were recorded and provided to this

transcriptionist by the Circuit Court and this certified

reporter accepts no responsibility for any events that occurred

during the above proceedings, for any inaudible and/or

indiscernible responses by any person or party involved in the

proceeding or for the content of the recording provided.

Dated: August 9, 2015

___/S/ Krista S. Michels____________

Krista S. Michels, CER #8490

Documents

Trancscript Song v Moore 2-20-15 (1)