Tag Archives: baby veronica

One Year Closer…..

23 Sep

The problem with adoptive parents is that they don’t ‘get’ the problem. I went into this journey having no experience in adoption with no adopted family members and having no thoughts of adopting. I was ‘adoption stupid’ so to speak. And in such a short amount of time, I’ve learned so much. Then again, I was open to where it would take me. I didn’t walk into this with any expectations as many on one side of the table or the other often do. Most walk into adoption as either the ‘giver’ or the ‘wanter’ and bring their expectations and experiences with them. I, having none and no wish list or expectations from it, was open to go where ever that path took me. In that way, I believe I’ve seen so much honesty from the whole experience, more even than those who are part of an adoption in some ways.

Many adoptive couples go in with their wish list and their wants and they have a desired outcome. Anything that doesn’t jive with that goal sort of gets thrown out or discounted. I’ve seen it time and time again in mommy and adoption forums. They have this notion that the bio parents are the bad guys, they get all the luck. These procreators are out there willy-nilly, being irresponsible and making babies they can’t care for and exposing them to all these horrid things. And even if at the very least, they view them as simply unable to care for the child and in bad circumstances, having to give the child up, there is a resentment there and there is a feeling of ‘better than’ that emanates from the adoptive couple. There’s a feeling of ‘saving’ the child. And the downright nasty ones even go so far as to plot and conspire with one another regarding contact, cutting the birth parent out of the picture and reassuring one another that they are right through it all.

I’ve spoken with adult adoptees. And I can say the number of happy, ‘no scars’ adult adoptees out there really is few. There is a tug of war playing out in the adult adoptee, often times not spoken of. There is a desire to find out about one’s heritage but often its accompanied by guilt. And this is true of even the best adoptions. I’ve seen adoptees feel they had to wait until ‘they’ or ‘she’ is dead (adoptive couple or adoptive mom) before they felt they could search out their roots. There is a feeling of betrayal on their part in trying and they are often fearful of the adoptive couple’s response to their want to search.  And in the happiest of adoptions, this feeling is even stronger because who would want to stab great adoptive parents in the back?

This isn’t just in unethical adoptions. This is the HAPPY ones too. This is all adoption. And no matter how many times you try to tell someone who has or is looking to adopt these things, their blinders, their desire to adopt is so strong that they just cannot compute. I cannot even begin to tell you in one blog post how the system of adoption is so corrupt, of the tricks of the trade, of the things they do both to lure in birth mothers and to lure in adoptive couples. I can’t begin to make you see what a huge money-maker adoption is. The stories of rehoming, of unethical adoptions and the money that changes hands. “Yeah, yeah” you say….these are the tales that get twisted, exaggerated and make for great tv but they aren’t true. And while some of that may be the worst of it, there is so much I can tell you about the happy adoptions and how even those leave scars and lines are divided and allegiances formed. How the child ends up with guilt and to some degree is the support system, the parent to the adoptive parent. The child often grows up trying to reassure the adoptive parent while at the same time, harbouring confusion, guilt, anger, wishes and a plethora of their own emotions about their situation, emotions they can’t share with their adoptive parent because they just wouldn’t understand, they are at opposite sides in the bargain and because the adoptive parents hold a ‘look at all we done for you’ card making the adopted child feel as if anything less than being grateful is a slap in their face.

So today, in honor of Veronica Rose Brown, ripped away from her biological family in an unethical adoption case on this date one year ago today, I want to share some words of other adult adoptees with you. These are responses to the simple question “Adoption Mythology?” and posted by anyone who wanted to contribute. Over 300 people contributed. (unedited)

That nurture can overcome nature.

that we won’t be curious and demand to know our history

That mothers forget the babies they gave birth to over time.

Adopters are saints and rescuers

You will get over it

That there is ever a one size fits all. All adoptees are happy. All adoptees are angry. All birth mothers regret. All birth mothers are happy. All adoptive parents are baby thieves. All adoptive parents are saints.

Adoption is better than an orphanage / being abused / being left behind a dumpster to die.

That adoptees should never want contact with their natural parents “after all the adoptive parents have done for them”

Really, reeeally wanting to be a mother means you’ll be a good one.

I work in in-patient mental health. We have a ridiculously disproportionate number of adopted kids in treatment. My adoption myth: that adopted kids are like regular kids, that adoption is NOT the trauma that needs to be addressed in therapy. That these kids are like everyone else and its a coincidence.

It’s not buying a child, it’s “fees”.

In Open adoption – questions get answers, you don’t feel lost, there’s no searching, you know your heritage.

1. That birthmothers had a choice 2. That birthmothers didn’t want or love their children 3. That women who want an open adoption must want to coparent 4. That an adoptee is a “gift” to their adoptive family 5. That APs are much more fit to parent than the birthparents 6. That birthmothers can just have more kids and just “move on” 7. That birth families don’t matter 8. That any birthmother must have been on drugs, sleeping around, or a drunk.

That I had a “better” life.

That there a ton of unwanted babies, and people who want to adopt deserve kids, so how could it be wrong to pair the unwanted kids up with the people who want them?

That adoption is an alternative to abortion. They shouldn’t even be in the same discussion!

The law knows what is best for the child. The judge will make a fair decision.

Reading these, I feel our collective pain – not just my fellow adoptees. Love to everyone.

Birthmothers had counseling so they were not coerced.

That searching for your bfamily means you don’t care about your afamily.

That if the child has adjustment issues or behavioral issues it is always the fault of DNA but if the child is a prodigy at something it was because he/she had all kinds of opportunities provided by the adoptive family.

There is no logic with which comments were chosen. Comments were randomly chosen and came from a collective of adult adoptees, adoptive parents and birth or first parents to give an insight into the thoughts of those affected by adoption.

Today though, as we think of Veronica, let the legacy of her story and her confinement be one of truth and education in all aspects of adoption. Don’t think that because one adoptee was happy or sad in their circumstances, that they all are. Or that because one adoptee was told the truth, that they all are. Don’t assume that because your best friend is a great mother who had a successful adoption and now has a loving home and great family that it is indicative of all adoptive families and homes. Don’t think because that friend is selfless that all adoptive parents are. And above all, don’t assume that when one speaks of their pain of their adoption experience that they are disturbed and disgruntled. Many, many adoptees, even those who had a seemingly great family, have emotional scars. Educate yourself and search out a more balanced picture.

The Capobiancos, in their long legal battle seem to have suffered both from their extreme desire for a child and from what I like to call ‘the Michael Jackson effect’. They had an entourage of supporters, all filling their world with glitter and unicorn dust, telling them all was right with the world and what they were doing was certainly the right thing both for them and for Veronica.  Nothing could have been further from the truth. Many adult adoptees and adoptive parents agree that an infant Veronica was far different from a 4 yr. old Veronica and that given the way circumstances had changed in her life, they were wrong in forcing the adoption after she had been reunited with her birth father.

I don’t want to speculate on what response a grown Veronica will have to that. One thing I do know for certain is that she will find her truth one day. Her story has been so well documented and will hopefully serve as the example of how not to go about adoption in the future.


We’re WASP’s. It’s What We Do.

12 Oct

This should infuriate many….not that it will, but it SHOULD.

When the Capobiancos set out to adopt Veronica one of their strategies was to strike down the ICWA or the Indian Child Welfare Act. I won’t bother you with a long explanation of this law. By now most of us have come to understand it’s purpose and the reasoning behind it.  But basically, it’s meant to protect Indian families and their children when it comes to adoption.  The Capobiancos logic behind their campaign to destroy this law seemed somewhat reasonable in theory. It was that they wanted to open up adoption and make it racially blind. They wanted adoptions to have no basis on race whatsoever. And they saw the Indian Child Welfare Act as giving racial preference to Indians and therefore, racist. I don’t agree but I can see that there was some logic there.

You see, it was Veronica they wanted so they formed a strategy.  The ICWA was only a hurdle in their path.  It wasn’t that this particular issue mattered to them but it was the thing they had to get past to get Veronica. Prior to, they probably hadn’t even heard of this law. But given it got in their way now, they had to set up a game plan. That game plan was to destroy the law. They didn’t care about the law or the people it was meant to protect. They didn’t even care what it’s intent was. They only cared that it was in their way with respect to their goal in that moment.  So they set out to destroy it to get Veronica and came up with the whole ‘it’s racist’ mantra later.  They came up with all the reasons for destroying it later to look as if they were truly being selfless. It didn’t matter whether they believed or supported their own hype. It was just what needed to be said to get there. They were like Kardashians advertising for QuickTrim. They didn’t need to buy their own product. That product didn’t even need to work. They didn’t need to believe it in. They just needed it to sell. They needed people to buy into their propaganda and support them in striking down parts of the ICWA so they could win.

The Cappobiancos chipped away at the ICWA not because they believed in their fight or because it should have been done. They did it for no other reason than they could. And now they raise the Indian child whose culture they’ve helped to destroy.

And after they won, Jessica Munday, their spokesperson, issued the following to their supporters:

While Congress has yet to amend the ICWA, our collective effort surrounding Veronica’s case will indeed help ensure this situation will not happen to another child. As a matter of fact, it already has. We have been informed her case has already been used in several cases to block similar travesties from occurring…. If anyone would like to continue advocating for children being hurt by the ICWA, please connect with the following groups.

Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare

Home Forever

Coalition for the protection of Indian Children and Families

(courtesy of The Daily Bastardette)

So you see, Munday, their spokesperson,  is now saying to supporters ‘Well folks, it’s been nice but we’ve done our job. We couldn’t care less about this. Find somewhere else to take your issues to. We’re done here. Go join up with someone else who wants to help you destroy ICWA now.’ Or the short form: ‘We’re done. Go scratch.’

It wasn’t that this issue itself mattered. The ICWA didn’t matter. Indians didn’t matter. Their plight didn’t matter. Even if the law was destroyed completely, it didn’t matter. Getting to keep Veronica was all that mattered. And if, after that happened, everything else crumbled and the world stopped turning, that just didn’t matter. So we, whether in support of Native Americans and the ICWA or not, are left to pick up the pieces and suffer the consequences. Whether you supported Brown or the Capobiancos, what’s left is the result of what they’ve done.  And that should infuriate you. Whether you fought to strengthen the law or tear is apart, your fight wasn’t even recognized because some couple who it mattered nothing to swept in, did their damage and ran.

We are left with a precedent here that tells other women that if they can hold out long enough, cut off all access to the child and never answer a door or accept any support, they too can thwart the father and shuffle his child off for adoption without his consent. And this case will be used as precedence both with respect to Native fathers and to all fathers. Women can now lawfully ‘Maldonado’ the fathers right out of their children.  (Yes, Maldonado has now become a verb.)

If you didn’t support the law and wanted it dismantled, you worked with a couple whose heart wasn’t in the fight with you. They climbed up your back and trampled your heads as they stood on top of you as their platform then they took their prize and ran. They used you to make themselves more visible and their voices louder but they cared nothing for you, your fight or any of the related legislation.

*WASP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Anglo-Saxon_Protestant

The House That Bought Likes Built

11 Oct

As a skeptic, one would think they’d just about seen it all and that almost nothing could hold any real shock value anymore.  …And then one turns their attention back to the ‘Baby Veronica’ saga.

By now the intentional misrepresentation of this case by the Capobianco camp comes as no surprise to most but there are just so many details that still keep rising to the surface of the muck that has been their adoption campaign.

In surfing the web the other day, we noticed Facebook had added a feature. WHEN that was added we don’t know but it caught our eye. We knew rumors were rampant regarding the Capobianco’s page (Save Veronica Rose) and their ‘buying likes’.  What is ‘buying likes’ you ask.  For those who run pages on social media sites, the number of people who like a page speaks to the page’s popularity and reach.  And in much the same way the latest craze catches on, if one sees that their friends or a lot of people like something, they want to be part of that, they want to like it too and see what it’s about. So as a page administrator the more likes you have, the more likes you attract.  To have very few likes is almost the kiss of death to a page on Facebook. So a page administrator can go to any number of services that will net you hundreds or thousands of likes for a fee. Now these ‘likes’ though will usually come from fake accounts and from foreign countries (that being the dead giveaway).

So as we surfed the net, as we said, we noticed this feature and there it was……


the dead giveaway. You see, we’d been led to believe that the public at large supported the Capobiancos in their fight for Veronica.  And those who supported Brown in this often wondered what others saw that maybe they weren’t seeing.  In their minds, they knew the thought of taking this child from her biological parents and giving her to some adoptive couple simply because that couple felt they wanted her more was just reprehensible.

And as the weeks wore on, the pages seemed to be neck and neck in the race to ‘save’ Veronica. With the Save Veronica Rose page having opened in December of 2011 and the Standing Our Ground For Veronica Brown page only having opened in July 2013, it seemed the SOG page would soon surpass the SVR page. But every time, right as that seemed inevitable, the number of likes on SVR would suddenly shoot through the roof again.  And as one attentive follower said, “their likes seemed to come in at odd hours of the night and from some pretty odd names.”

And come to find out, it WAS all a sham. There weren’t thousands of people who liked their page and agreed with their views. There were just plenty of fake profiles and bought numbers who boosted their ranks.

If their ‘likes’ had been authentic, their most popular city likely would have been Charleston, SC seeing that is where the Capobiancos are from and where their support base originated.  You see this is true when you then compare their info to the SOG page supporting Brown whose support base came primarily from his home state of Oklahoma and from Native Americans.  Their most popular city then was Tulsa, OK as would be expected. But Istanbul? Could that even possibly be real? A quick search of the topic of Baby Veronica doesn’t even return results in Istanbul. One can see articles about vacationing there or car seats for babies in Istanbul taxis and other equally mundane topics but this case never even dotted the radar there making the fact that it’s the SVR page’s most popular city even more ridiculous.


It really makes one wonder, if they lied about this, and they lied about so much of this story, then what else were we lied to about?

We were told they’d adopted this girl and Brown, who’d abandoned her even before birth was using some technicality to get her back. We were told he’d waited two years to even step forward. Well, we now know from Judge Malphrus’ ruling in 2011 that Brown was never found to have abandoned his daughter.  We also know that until it was just recently finalized, they’d never even adopted her, that they were only attempting to adopt her. We know Veronica was placed with them by Maldonado, her bio mother,  and they had been warned she was an at risk placement meaning they knew their adoption may well never go through if the birth father stepped forward. We know Brown was never told where his daughter was. We know he stepped forward to get custody of her the moment he knew of the adoption and her whereabouts. (One can read of more inconsistencies here and here.)

But it leads us to wonder, if one builds their foundation on lies, builds up a house of cards if you will, can they really prevail? We’d all like to think ideally that justice will prevail in the end but was that the case here? Or, with the foundation of this all being lies backed by loads of money and lifted off the ground by a woman who was rather savvy with marketing, further bolstered by political ties and helped along by the couple’s socioeconomic and racial background, was this a losing battle for Brown and his supporters from the start? Can one really buy their way through life?

The answer is yes.  An attorney best summed the problem up with ‘Truth is irrelevant. He who has the better story wins.’

Many couples wait years to adopt. Many still aren’t successful and find themselves having had several adoptions ‘fall through’. And many similar cases wait months if not years between hearings to determine their fate. But not the Capobiancos. No sir! They netted a baby on the first try (IVF attempts excluded and speaking strictly on adoption). They were given front row seats to her birth, a moment Maldonado denied Brown.  The ICPC approval was rushed right through allowing them to take her home. They didn’t worry about those pesky details like if her father spent sleepless nights wondering about her or not. And then when he came calling for his child, they bought the best defense money could buy. They chipped away at laws protecting endangered cultures and minorities. They even looked good doing it claiming they were wanting equal rights for all in adoptionland rather than saying they were simply trying to open up yet another market for adoptable children. They got a pretty good deal as these things go too. They were able to buy themselves the attention of a couple of the Supreme Court justices by retaining those attorneys who were on an elbow-rubbing basis with the justices.

So where does all that leave us now? Where that leaves us now is that the Capobiancos have been successful at destroying Native protections, in destroying any idea of fairness we had left, of destroying any notion of justice we had left and any faith we had in our justice system. It’s shown other couples they too can do the same, they too can have their pick of the litter regardless of whether or not the bio parents want to keep their children for themselves.  In fact, they’ve destroyed the idea that a bio parent has a right to raise their own child. They’ve drawn up the blueprint for cases to come.  And while some may say that is exaggerating things a bit, I’d challenge them.  One need only to look to the case of Baby Deserai to see how accurate that statement is. With an Oklahoma ruling already in place calling for Desirai’s return, the 60’s something Bixlers of SC refuse to return her. They’ve continued to move forward with their adoption there despite a loving biological family who want her and despite the fraudulent nature by which they obtained her.  Soon the state of South Carolina will begin to throw their weight around and they’ll claim they’re the only authority with regard to her case as well.

For more on the Baby Desirai case, go to https://www.facebook.com/StandingOurGroundforDesirai

UPDATE: These people change faster than we can keep up with. After reporting their bought likes here, immediately their page changed to this….


We can’t explain how they made the sudden change but we’ve noted it regardless. However, we’ve also noticed that the number of people talking about their page went down as well. There has certainly been some fast doctoring happening. Maybe Mr. Caricofe has been able to show them a few tricks given he is the resident computer guru there at Munday’s Trio Solutions. Or it could simply be that they’ve changed the home city on most of the fake accounts liking the page to Charleston, South Carolina.

Give Us Our Prize and Our Money Too

1 Oct

We will follow this to the end. We’ve committed to bringing facts to light in this case and Veronica’s return to the Capobiancos, at least to us, does not mean an end. This case will go on to affect other children and other cases. So in that vein, we bring you more of the story.  We ask that the reader please excuse the long, meandering nature of today’s post. We have so much information we’d like to bring you that it’s difficult to be as concise as we’d like and more facts are coming forth daily.

In the months leading up to what was to be the finalization of the Capobiancos adoption of Veronica, we were told that the Capobiancos would  go to Oklahoma to facilitate the most loving and caring transition of Veronica as humanly possible. They made sure to leak that transition plan online. And that plan called for a week long transition with Veronica spending less time with her father and more time with the Capobiancos as the week progressed. The psychologist who put that together did seem to sympathize with the situation and seems to have given the situation considerable thought but remarked that the damage would still be done to the child regardless. She also noted that the best they could do would be to redirect or distract by giving her a cookie in hopes that she would get past the hurt and soon forget what would happen to her.

That transition plan can be found here.






But as we’ve maintained from the start, there HAD to be more to this. If the Capobiancos were going to go to Oklahoma to get Veronica, then why was Brown in hot water for not showing up that Sunday with the child in South Carolina? The initial transition plan and their statements made no mention of Brown making any appearance in South Carolina.

Well we’re afraid our suspicions were correct. In fact, court documents show that while the Capobiancos led us to believe they were this loving couple willing to do anything to assure the comfort and well being of this child, they in fact submitted a second, surreptitious transition plan to the courts. This transfer plan was far less concerned with Veronica’s state of mind or her reaction to being taken from her father. In fact, aside from one visit at the attorney’s office, this plan basically called for a two day transition with Brown being available an additional day at their disposal should his presence be needed to smooth things over with Veronica and make her more compliant. It also stated the transition was to happen in their home with Brown on their turf and presumably much more controllable given he’d be in their state.







We were lied to. We were duped. AND if we were lied to about this, what else were we lied to about? Via the testimony posted on this site, you can see we were lied to by birth mother and the Capobiancos with regard to Brown having any knowledge of the adoption. Birth mother’s testimony also was not in line with her earlier depositions.  At various points, many of them were impeached during the family court hearing.  We’ve also heard from the psychologist, Jan Hunt, who said she was duped by their Guardian Ad Litem into reporting favorably for them while being given incorrect information on which to base her report.  And now we see we were lied to on this issue as well. And with Brown’s hearing for extradition on the parental kidnapping charges looming and now the news of their recent suit against him, could we again be being led astray here?


According to Michael Overall with Tulsa World late last week, the Capobiancos are also now suing Brown for attorneys fees and costs for their trip to Oklahoma.  He reportedly had a copy of the documents filed September 9th and adamantly noted it was the Capobiancos rather than the courts who initiated the suit. However, the couple insist they were not the ones initiating the suit, the South Carolina courts were.  (Overall’s piece has since been taken down although as you can see here and here, other outlets covered the same issue.) We have to ask ourselves, with such an extensive history of lies, are we wise to believe then that courts are suing on their behalf and this suit isn’t being brought forth by them? Weren’t they also the ones who reminded us very early on that one cannot sue for the benefit of another? (This was their argument early on when they maintained Brown was only trying to get Veronica back for his parents. We were told he could not sue for custody on behalf of another. This was their argument with respect to the initial Oklahoma suit as Brown requested his parents look after the child while he was deployed.)

*We will have more on the money issues associated with this case in the future.


This order finalizing the couple’s adoption of Veronica also brings forth a strong point and again, another lie. We were told early on that Brown signed his parental rights away and that it’s only now that he wants to change his mind. He’s a dead beat for doing so and as such he is not entitled to his biological child.  We then have to ask, if he signed his rights away, why then was it necessary for the South Carolina family courts to terminate his rights? We’ve been lied to again it seems. Many knew all along and documents attest to the fact that Brown did NOT sign his parental rights away. And we also know Maldonado admitted that Brown had no idea of her plans to put the child up for adoption.

We also point out that a quick internet search reveals two things with respect to Judge Martin of South Carolina: 1. that he has a history of being a subpar judge with a questionable history there and 2., there are allegations that Martin has had prior dealings or was familiar with the Capobianco family prior to this case. In his Enforcement Order of August 5th, it seems rather obvious to the reader Martin seemed to have a personal stake in this and was upset that he’d been named a defendant in a suit filed days earlier in this case. It would seem he had trouble differentiating between his personal emotions and South Carolina adoption law and, based on other online articles, that he has a long history of allowing his anger to override his making legal, moral and ethical decisions.

Initially Martin pressed for Custodial Interference charges on Brown. After some thought, it appears he realized he’d made some sort of procedural mistake. He then decided that what should have happened was a contempt of court charge instead. Oddly though, the Custodial Interference charges were not dropped but the contempt charges were added on instead. And while it’s well within the courts judgement to issue fines in conjunction with almost all charges, the one part of this being pursued by the courts rather than the Capobiancos are fines for each day Mr. Brown had his daughter beyond the date of their adoption being finalized. That definitely appears to be a judge whose anger has overridden good judgement and gone to a personal level so much so that not only is the punishment of losing his child not enough, Brown must also lose his freedom and finances too.

There are also some who will say well, what was Martin supposed to do? The South Carolina Supreme Court left him no option. As an officer of the courts, Martin’s job is to uphold justice. Veronica’s rights were violated. She was not given a best interest hearing.  Objections were brought up with regard to other documents being amiss too. Martin flat out refused to even consider those objections citing his being instructed by the higher court to ignore all other issues and simply PUSH THIS ADOPTION THROUGH! But Martin in his role as defender of justice could have done what was right rather than what was ordered.  And he did so without ever even protesting. In fact, he seemed more than happy to be finalizing this adoption and terminating Brown’s parental rights. Being ordered to do so is never an excuse for doing the wrong thing.


But the absolute most important issues aside from all of this are that Veronica and her feelings were given no thought in this, that we were lied to in that they had a second plan up their sleeve that also disregarded Veronica’s emotions and that Veronica was declared to be a ‘special needs’ child based solely on her race. I’ve asked many in the field of adoption and foster care why this is. What’s that have to do with anything? Well, in foster placements, states are awarded much more money for the care of special needs children than they are for average children. And in the Dakotas especially, this is an overused excuse for the state to step in and take Native children at alarming rates for little to no reason. It’s nothing more than a way to boost revenues in an already overburdened child welfare system. However, in adoption, there are adoption tax credits to be had. And while I’m still not sure of the specifics, I’ve been led to believe that when adopting a child with special needs, these credits could be ongoing.  A quick check of this online states that couples adopting a special needs child at the very least are entitled to take the full deduction without having to document their adoption expenses which leaves us also to wonder then if there is any merit to stories Maldonado was paid for the child…an expense one could not legally document.

Godspeed Little Star

26 Sep

News spread like wildfire. By now, we all know, the Oklahoma Supreme Court lifted the stay in the case of Brown V. DeLapp (although many of you may know it better as Adoptive Couple V. Baby Girl). On Monday, the OKSC lifted their stay at approximately 2:30 pm. By 7:30, Veronica was gone. Officials went to the Jack Brown house at the Cherokee Nation complex and removed her. She was escorted away by Ms. Nimmo, attorney for the Cherokee Nation,  who with heavy heart had to deliver Veronica to the adoptive couple waiting at tribal headquarters. As she was taken away from her family, her cry rang out….. “No, I don’t want to go! I don’t want to go! I don’t want to go!” It fell on deaf ears. There was nothing that could be done.

In physically coming to Oklahoma, the Capobiancos forced the spotlight on this child. They got preferential treatment in that, because of the media storm they’d created, their coming to the state caused this case to be given priority with the attention of the Governors of both states.  Media outlets were literally drooling over the chance to report every detail. Often cases of this nature die a slow death in our court systems. They lie there for months and sometimes years between hearings while a child hangs in the balance despite urgent concerns regarding their welfare. Each side is given the opportunity during the down time to mount a defense. Mr. Brown nor Veronica was given this chance. This couple cared only for claiming their prize and quickly. With each hearing came a flood of photos, speculation and the constant reminder from Mrs. Capobianco that precious time and money were being lost and ‘could we hurry this up please.’ No other case of this nature has been given this type of preferential treatment with the adoptive couple being catered to and given hearings and appearances almost daily.

They don’t tell you the Capobiancos had no incentive to mediate. The judge’s statement read that both parties negotiated in good faith. They don’t tell you the details of those negotiations though. They don’t say that while the couple publicly stated they want everyone to play a part in Veronica’s life, privately they reneged on offers and offered little to nothing. They don’t say that to have the father in Veronica’s life is their constant reminder that this child isn’t totally theirs. They don’t say their actions have spoken volumes and they sought to sever any and all ties between her and her father.

We didn’t realize Mr. Brown had no chance. We didn’t realize the media was so skewed. With CNN on their side (Adoptive Couple’s forces having befriended many at the network) and leading their charge, many in the country were spoon fed details that were outright deceptive. With pressure from both Governor’s and threats of jail time, it seems that the couple were willing to stop at nothing short of destroying Mr. Brown’s life. Not happy with simply taking his child, they now sue for attorney’s fees and fines. And while initiated by the courts on their behalf supposedly, Adoptive Couple has yet to speak out and ask that the war be ended, charges be dropped or that their supporters stop harassing the Browns.

The public was led to believe despite all facts that Veronica would somehow remember this couple. We were shown pictures of a happy, smiling Veronica and told she DID remember them. What we weren’t told was that these pictures were taken after weeks of visitation involving many gifts given and that the child, while not remembering them, had gotten to know them. We weren’t told these visits were within the setting of a familiar play space to Veronica and that she viewed these visits as simply play dates knowing she went home to mommy and daddy in the end. We also weren’t told what Veronica’s reaction was to them once she had time to go home each night and process the whole situation in her own mind, what she may have told friends or teachers about them, or what she felt about them in general. Getting to know and remembering are two far different things.  While no one doubts the Capobiancos will care for Veronica, their need to paint their relationship with her as natural and somehow destined by twisting the facts is questionable.

But the sad reality is that Veronica is gone and the damage will forever be irreparable. You see, at birth to two, a child is developing but their long term memory isn’t yet there. They are more concerned with their needs being met and react primarily to discomfort. At the age Veronica lived with her father, by four, her memory develops. She grew to know Mr. Brown as her natural born father and his wife as her mother. Her world expanded to relationships and she began to take in her surroundings. To her, real or imagined, these two are her psychological parents.  She will always remember them now that she’s had time to bond with them.  She will always know them as her ‘real’ mom and dad. Anyone else is merely a substitution with her hopes continuing the rest of her life to find answers as to where they went and what happened to them. No answer provided by anyone else will suffice. She will need to seek her own answers to be sure of their truth.

And it’s that desperate need to paint this bond as something shared between both them and the child as something natural and destined that concerns many. Veronica didn’t share this bond. This bond was entirely one sided. It was born from the Capobiancos desire for children, a desire so strong they fooled their own minds into imagining if only they could obtain her, the bond and feelings would surely be reciprocated.  And if not immediately reciprocated then they could be nurtured over time using Melanie’s knowledge of psychology , manipulating in order to create a bond.

Having feelings of maternal urgency or an urge to mother is far different than maternal instinct. Maternal instinct is a need to protect. Maternal urgency is the desperate feeling one’s biological clock is ticking. The desire here to be a parent so overwhelmed rational thought. Because if Melanie had maternal instinct, that instinct would have said Veronica was with a loving and fit bio father who wanted her. It would have told them they would damage her if they tampered with it. It would have driven them to protect her even at the cost of their loss.  Who did what when, claims of abandonment,  who had her first, none of that will ever matter later. Her age or how many years she spent with either won’t matter. She could have been 6 or 10 or even 13 when they took her. It doesn’t matter if she spent two years or one summer with her father. But she now knows another set of parents exist, a biological parent is out there waiting for her. You cannot put the genie back in the bottle.  What will matter is she got to know them at an age that she will remember them and that they were taken from her for reasons short of severe. There was no abuse. There was no neglect.  And anything short of that will never be justifiable in her mind as she grows.

We know Matt and Melanie will care for her. We know they’ll provide her with all they can in life. She’ll have the best. We know they love her. But while that’s wonderful and kind, she will be an empty shell. She will wait for her day. She will have nagging questions. And even if she is led to believe her father was a axe murderer, she will have a pride in being his daughter throughout it all. She will wait for the day when she can reconnect to him. To slander his name will fuel her determination. To make no mention of him at all will peak her curiosity. It’s one game that no one can win because despite what you say, she will have her own feelings on the issue. You see, Veronica IS Dusten Brown. She is the living, breathing extension of her father. And by trying to sever that bond, they’ve only made it stronger and more urgent. They will make her more determined.  They will forever have to buy her love while all the while she quietly waits until the day she can get her answers and find her roots. She won’t outwardly say that. She’ll harbor that within herself for fear of hurting their feelings or making them feel she is ungrateful for her beautiful life but those feelings will quietly be there.  Until one day, one day she will Google her name. Or she’ll wonder what happened to those other parents she remembers. Her mind will lead her home.

Despite it all, she will remember she is Veronica Brown from ‘Nowater, Okahoma’.

And because there is no word for goodbye in the Cherokee language, the Cherokee Nation, family and supporters all say dodadagohv’I – we will see each other again.  Veronica will look to that road one day. One day she will hear the beat of the drum. One day she will come home and her parents will see her again.

We wish you Godspeed Little Star.  You get big and strong and we will wait for as long as it takes. All roads lead to home.


Thwarted Fathers

18 Sep

Single mothers get recognition. We raise them in praise every Mother’s day. Single Ladies get a song. What exactly do ‘thwarted fathers’ get? Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch.  Well unless you consider the scripted ridicule.  And then they get ‘deadbeat’, ‘loser’, ‘serial impregnator’, ‘sperm donor’, etc…

According to the Meriam Webster dictionary, to thwart is to:

  1.  run counter to so as to effectively oppose or baffle : contravene
  2.  oppose successfully :  defeat the hopes or aspirations of
  3.  pass through or across

You see, the gist of what you are about to see is that according to Judge Malphrus of South Carolina in her ruling of Sept. 2011, Dusten Brown was a THWARTED FATHER.  That means he was effectively opposed, that adoptive couple effectively violated his rights.  It means they defeated his hopes and aspirations of being a father. They passed right over him, ignoring his rights and stealing his child with trickery of the law much like some fairy,  adopto-land magicians.

I realize many have been told for a long time that Mr. Brown abandoned his child and is a horrible person but that simply was not the truth. It makes the entire tragedy that has become Baby Girl’s life much more palatable if we believe this couple were SAVING her. After all, they even named their cause SAVE Veronica Rose. They are saving her right?

But a deeper read and some thought lets you get a glimpse of adopto-world tactics, into what happens when an adoptive couple is so desperate to adopt that they are willing to ‘thwart’ the father to do so.

They find birth mothers in unfortunate situations. They offer inducements. They get her support and permission. She often has an axe to grind with the birth father. Adoptive couples and attorneys are often very eager to help birth mothers solve this little issue. They often forgo some part of the paperwork. They cut the father out of the picture. The list goes on.

But here we see,  Mr. Brown still won his case on more issues than simply ICWA.  They found his rights were intact and had to be terminated first. They found terminating them was NOT in Baby Girl’s best interest.  They would not terminate them. They found birth mother lied. They found adoptive couple to be untruthful when seeking to terminate his rights based solely on lack of support for six consecutive months.  They found Adoptive Couple was trying to use a loophole to get around him. They found he tried to be there but wasn’t allowed to be. They found adoptive couple to be impeding contact between Mr. Brown and his daughter.

But somehow, on appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, the only issue before them was ICWA and whether that applied.  And in another unfortunate leap, South Carolina (on remand) seemed all too eager to forgo Baby Girl’s right to a best interest hearing and various other procedural safeguards and simply hand the prize over to the highest bidders, the Capobiancos.  They were able to ignore every other legal ground on which Mr. Brown won his case.  They simply said ICWA did not apply so therefore, regardless of his rights and any other legalities, these people, as well-to-do South Carolina consitituents should have his child simply because as Mrs. Capobianco stated, they wanted her more.

How did we get from there to here? How can our justice system allow this to happen to a legal birth parent in this country? What if this were your father? Your son? Your child?  How do we fail a child like this?  I’m hoping it’s a question we all will be asking ourselves. I hope it’s something that doesn’t allow one to sleep at night. I hope it’s something that outrages others as much as it’s outraged me. I hope it’s something that compels one to scream and yell and write letters and tell the world this just isn’t even humane!



The Art of Deception

13 Sep

Often, if we compare statements one has made at different times, we are able to detect slight differences. We can see how one’s story changes. We’d like to bring you for comparison, Birth Mother, Christy Maldonado’s affidavit from the Oklahoma court case in Adoptive Couple vs. Baby Girl.

At this point, after being served and finding out he had a child, Mr. Brown moved to obtain custody in the Oklahoma courts. Here you see Birth Mother’s statement at that time.




First we see from the case title “Dusten Dale Brown vs. Christinna Maldonado, Matthew and Melanie, last name unknown and Does 1-25” that Father’s testimony stating he was unaware of Baby Girl’s whereabouts and didn’t know who had her was in fact plausible.  At this point, he and his attorney are unaware of the Adoptive Couple’s names other than that they are known as Matthew and Melanie.  His statements in later proceedings are consistent with initial filings and the story has been consistent throughout.

From these pages we see statement #4 conflicts with all other testimony from Birth Mother stating she had no contact with Mr. Brown during the later stages of her pregnancy. This affidavit is from an earlier time in this case.  We are then led to ask ‘Well, which is the truth?’ Was she in contact with him as she states here or wasn’t she? We must wonder, was Miss Maldonado honest here but later coached as to what her statement should be in order to be more in line with Adoptive Couple’s assertions?

In statement #5, she states Mr. Brown did wish to sign away his rights. But again, we see from Mr. Brown’s testimony, he used the terms ‘sign away my rights’ and ‘give custody to Miss Maldonado’ interchangeably.  Could this be a rather technical sort of play on words? Could he have expressed his wish to ‘sign his rights away’ to her instead and was that left out?

Statement #6 tells us Mr. Brown did nothing to establish his rights to paternity. We must take issue on this one, not in defense of Mr. Brown but in defense of all who are not aware of their rights. In many unethical adoptions, the fact that the biological father is unaware of his rights is often the very thing adoption agencies hope and pray for. The often seek out spiteful, uneducated or unstable mothers hoping the fathers have no clue. They often reassure these vulnerable women that father will never find out or they coach them on how to make sure father never finds out.  Simple internet searches of adoption agencies will show in their Q&A, they often address this issue (sometimes vaguely or sometimes via a ‘chat with a counselor’ option so as not to state it publicly on their page).  But rest assured, should you want to get around the pesky issue of father’s rights, there is an agency out there willing to help.  (Read More)

Many father’s also have no idea that a putative father registry exists in their state. They have never even heard of the term. With some state laws saying a prospective father must register with his state’s putative father registry before birth or within so many days of the birth, it’s often a way to subvert father’s rights rather than assure they are firmly in place. And in some cases, despite having registered, the father’s rights are still ignored.

We know that the adoptive couple filed their adoption petition on Sept. 18th, 2009. However, from statement # 8, we  see that South Carolina did not approve of Baby Girl’s placement in the state until Sept. 21st, 2009.  We also know that Adoptive Couple didn’t take Baby Girl to South Carolina until approximately 7 or 8 days after birth (Sept. 22-23) from Adoptive Mother’s testimony.  On the issue, South Carolina adoption law specifically states that the child must be present in the state at the time a petition is filed. The child need not have been born there but must be present there at the time.  Baby Girl was not present in South Carolina at the time they filed the petition for adoption.

SECTION 63-9-50. Children who may be adopted. 

Any child present within this State at the time the petition for adoption is filed, irrespective of place of birth or place of residence, may be adopted.

We further see from Birth Mother’s testimony, ICPC procedure was not adhered to in that the ICPC agency was not told of Baby Girl’s Native American heritage.  We see that birth mother states that although she knew father’s name and birth date were wrong, she did little to provide the correct information. And had that been done, then not only would Father have been notified but his tribe would also have been given the chance to intervene.   Baby Girl not present in South Carolina when the petition for adoption was filed, and when she did arrive there it was by rather suspicious means.

And in #9,  she uses THE most used reason in all contested adoptions… ‘but we’ve had the baby for so long, we’ve bonded and shouldn’t have to give baby back’ theory. This is almost always used in every single contested and unethical adoption in history.  By holding on to baby long enough, an adoptive couple often asserts that now, after bonding has occurred, removing baby from their care would be detrimental.  Of note though, in this case, Adoptive Couple used this theory initially but since Baby Girl has been with Father now for the past two years of her life, they now assert the opposite in stating a move now, although damaging, should still occur regardless and Baby Girl’s best interests should NOT be considered. They’ve also made attempts to block the appointment of a Guardian Ad Litem in Oklahoma.

It almost sounds as if this entire thing was drafted by Attorney Paul Swain, who we know was involved not only in this case but in the Baby Desirai case as well.   Mr. Swain makes sure to let the prospective birth mother know, not only can he deal with that pesky birth father issue, but even if you are a young, pregnant mother, he can deal with that too.  As we understand, as was allegedly done in the Desirai case, Mr. Swain can also deal with guardianship, taking custody of the baby himself in order to more expediently place baby.




Pesky Birth Father you need to work around?


Need to shuffle that baby off more quickly?

Dusten Brown In His Own Words

3 Sep

We’d imagine the most annoying thing to a dog would be a flea on its ass in that one spot… well, we’re off topic already.  Geez.  Anyway, so the reason we find ourselves posting is because someone just got themselves in a fit and decided to try to beat us to the punch.  You see, we had this schedule all planned. We would post every few days and give you a little more with each post.  And we even had a bet here among authors of this blog.  We wondered how long it would take for the other side to do exactly what they did last night. Last night, someone from the Capobianco camp released what looks to be the cross-examination of Dusten Brown from the 2011 South Carolina family court hearing.  However, you see, in true Capobianco camp fashion, they only released for you the most damning 15 pages, out of context, of what is really more than 60 pages of testimony from Mr. Brown.  They hoped the reader would be so stupid as to just eat that little slice of garbage right up and run as fast as they could to hit the ‘LIKE’ button on their page on Facebook and jump right on into the cesspool of Dusten bashing.  Rather foolish given there are other forums out there eager to call their bluff wouldn’t you say?

We committed when we began publishing to bring you whatever was relevant in this matter no matter how damning. We decided early on we would publish it all no matter how damning.  With the testimony being roughly 700 pages chock full of experts and court procedure, we committed to bringing you the important points albeit a bit more condensed.  We figured our readers wouldn’t necessarily want to weed through all that, bored to tears by tedious stuff so we’d cut it down and bring you the stuff that mattered most. We also decided to only redact information if it were about other persons not party to litigation.

We were honestly even hoping to move on to ‘Drunk Driving’ week but, well, fleas are impatient little buggers.

So as usual, let us point out a few things before you read….

  • According to court records, at this point in time, Dusten’s salary is roughly $20k annually.  In the last year, he’s paid more than $20k in attorney’s fees. He’s caught up on some of his child support. He’s purchased new furniture for Baby Girl’s room along with clothes and toys. He’s paid for attorneys in the Oklahoma case prior to this case.  Now he’s probably had the help of family because his does seem to be a close-knit family but regardless, by our count, in one year he’s probably had to pay far more than his annual salary thereby proving his certain commitment to Baby Girl.
  • You can see, as was the case with Mrs. Brown, that Dusten Brown may not have legal knowledge with respect to terminology and the terms ‘custody’ and ‘rights’.  He uses the terms interchangeably.  However, he does seem honest to a fault.  He uses the terms ‘sign my rights’ which would lead one to believe he intended to sign away his parental rights to this child but we ask that you look at intent. He does explain in several sections that to him that meant signing custody over to Ms. Maldonado and even notes he hopes that will appease her and they will reunite and marry.  As we’ve also seen in Mrs. Brown’s testimony posted earlier, Dusten Brown hopes even at this late date, albeit probably naively, that he can still somehow get back together with Ms. Maldonado even as this trial is taking place.
  • Brown did in fact offer support in the pregnancy which was rebuffed by birth mother. Birth mother created an artificial abandonment scenario by refusing any support or contact from Mr. Brown.
  • Brown did make inquiries as to the health and welfare of both Ms. Maldonado and Baby Girl but was again rebuffed.  He even went so far as to have friends inquire for him.  His mother, Mrs. Brown admits in her testimony she too attempted contact. At that point, Dusten Brown’s only options would have been to force his presence upon Ms. Maldonado.  We can only guess had he done that, we’d be witnessing a much different scenario now as Mr. Brown would be facing any number of harassment and stalking charges.
  • Brown made many inquiries of his commanding officers seeking advice including on Baby Girl’s dependency eligibility early on.  There is no requirement of pre-birth child support so he couldn’t have paid that at that point. As for any support paid to the Capobiancos for Baby Girl, that is best explained this way…. In adoptions of this nature, an adoptive couple would normally be advised not to accept any support from a biological parent as it may give the impression the parent is paying support for what is their child.  Legally they do not want this child seen as someone else’s but as available for adoption with no support.  Adoptive couples would not want to give the impression they are acknowledging by accepting money that this is another person’s child. They would be advised to not accept any funds.  And Mr. Brown, as you see he mentions here, has sent funds to the Capobiancos for support. He mentions a ‘trust fund’. However, what he incorrectly understood that to be and what it is are two different matters. What this really refers to is that the Capobiancos attorneys most likely put all funds into a trust account to be set aside and held pending the outcome of this trial so they wouldn’t be seen as accepting child support.
  • And lastly, as we speculated in earlier posts and as evidenced by other court documents, Mr. Brown’s only reasoning for not bringing up his Native heritage sooner was that he was rushed to file in this matter before deployment. The opposition would like to think that because he doesn’t wear a sign and carry a tomahawk, that his Indian heritage is not important to him.  We challenge you to show us any German who wears the same sign, who would carry a beer stein everywhere. Or an Irishman who carries the same sign who speaks as if he just jumped out of the Lucky Charms box. Because while our example are stereotypical and rude, this is exactly the logic they use. They assume that because Mr. Brown doesn’t fit their stereotype, he is not Indian enough for them.  Many Indians will tell you and it’s been mentioned ad nauseam  that the transfer of culture from one generation to another occurs in the stories told and the foods eaten and the small, day-to-day exchanges unconsciously that matter.  One would not announce to their children while in full Native regalia “CHILDREN, COME, GATHER.  I INTEND TO TEACH YOU YOUR CULTURE TODAY FROM 4-6 PM WHILE WE TAKE PICTURES TO DOCUMENT THIS OCCASION.”

Note: The only testimony with respect to Mr. Brown not included here is by Mr. Lowndes (attorney for the Guardian Ad Litem) and the reason for this was simply brevity and because it was repetitive of the cross by Mr. Godwin.

Side Note: The blog putting this out uses the Tsalagi or Cherokee word “GIGESDI” meaning purple. We commend them for coming out of their hole to learn a new word in Baby Girl’s native language. However, simply learning a new word does not mean they have any concern for Baby Girl’s heritage.

Testimony can be found here.

Grandmother Alice Brown In Her Own Words

1 Sep

As promised, we wanted to bring  you more information in the words of those involved.  Today we feature the words of Alice Brown, paternal grandmother of Baby Girl.

However, before reading, we’d like to advise you of a few things.

  • Native American families in general hold the belief that family, no matter how far extended, are part of a larger family unit.  A typical Indian family unit, meaning those who reside within one household, often includes not just a mother, father and their children but rather can and often does include grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. This is not done for any financial reasons as one might think. It is done because family, even extended family, is very important to them.  Having one’s family, their food, their culture all together in this way is very meaningful for them.  It is not unusual that they would have a large extended household. Nor is it unusual to not use daycare services. This is because often grandparents also fulfill the role of a parent to some extent, watching the children while a parent is at work.
  • Many Native Americans also report that if they don’t live in the same home as their extended family, then they live on the same property or on the same street or in very, very close proximity to extended family members. Living with one’s parents in context of their lives is a positive as opposed to the way other Americans might view it.
  • Some sections of the documents needed to be redacted. Any information redacted was due to either A. it discussed individuals not related to the case or B. out of courtesy because it is impolite to tell a lady’s age.
  • Custody can either be physical or legal. Physical custody of a child is custody of the body for simplification.  The child would live with their physical custodian. This person has final say on the day to day matters like giving permission for events and visits with friends and schedules.  Legal custody refers to a custodian’s ability to make legal and medical decisions for the child. This person can consent to legal matters and sign for the child. It also refers to an obligation to support the child and the right of the child to inherit from parents or vice versa.  This person can also consent to surgery or other medical procedures.  Parental rights is the term that encompasses both legal and physical custody.  To terminate one’s parental rights, either a court would have to determine a parent was unfit or a person would have to appear in court, in front of a judge and sign away all rights to their child.  One cannot terminate their rights via text, process server, etc. Had Mr. Brown actually terminated or signed away his rights, this hearing wouldn’t have taken place because his case would have been thrown out much earlier on due to lack of legal ground with which to file.
  • Keep in mind when reading this that not everyone understands the law and legal terms. Mrs. Brown tends to use the words ‘custody’ and ‘rights’ interchangeably.  Please forgive the confusion with respect to the wording and try to understand what it is Mrs. Brown is trying to convey overall.

NOTE:  In Birth Mother’s testimony provided earlier, you notice she said she did not spend holidays with the family and did not attend Mr. Brown’s military graduation ceremonies.  Here,  you can read what Mrs. Brown has to say on the issue.

NOTE: Jo Prowell, the guardian ad litem referred to here is also the guardian ad litem the Capobiancos insist is unbiased and is the only GAL Veronica needs. They insist Veronica needs no further representation by either another guardian ad litem or attorney because this woman is representing her in South Carolina matters and they feel she is the most competent to handle all matters…..despite her clearly biased behavior discussed in these documents.

Testimony can be found HERE.

Debunking The Myths

29 Aug

Maybe we’ll make this a regular feature or maybe we won’t but either way, if you hear something out there and want to know if it’s true or not, you can certainly comment and we’ll do our best to prove or disprove the rumors.

Today however, there seems to be a fact sheet floating around adoption land touting the virtues of the Capobiancos and their kind deed.  So we’ll start there.  You can find their PR script here.   Coincidentally, this same information can be found on posts from the Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare who also coincidentally were the force behind collecting donations for the Capobianco’s legal battle despite it being stated that their attorney’s were working pro bono.

1. Matt and Melanie did not ‘buy’ Veronica. Their adoption is ethical and legal in every possible sense. They followed every step by the book. The US Supreme Court found it legal, as did SC Supreme Court and Charleston County Family Court.

Well, thus far, nothing has been uncovered proving there was any exchange of money for the child. However, as reported by Suzette Brewer, investigative reporter for Indian Country Today, birth mother was suddenly able to get out of debt, catch up on her mortgage and was seen with a new SUV. It’s also common knowledge among the adoption community that often times ‘gifts’ pass through unnoticed and undisclosed to birth mothers as unofficial compensation.  While adoptive couples have to disclose any fees associated with the adoption, often times these gifts and donations are just never mentioned or are hidden by reporting them as other miscellaneous expenses. 

2. Christy has custody of her two children and is doing a great job raising them. They all want this to be over desperately and miss Veronica.

Oklahoma court records say differently.  At some point, it appears the birth mother had some other person caring for her children. Records indicate child support was redirected to someone other than her in 2011. Courts direct child support to the person caring for the child which obviously is not her. 

3. Melanie was never charged with a DUI and does not have a criminal background. This sickens us every time we read this.

Also reported by investigative journalist Suzette Brewer, in fact, she was charged with underage drinking and later with a DUI.  Absent in all of this so far has been any denial from Melanie herself which is rather telling.  On this, we assume one would just have to take a wait and see approach and see if that information doesn’t surface.

4. Lori McGill is an incredible attorney in DC and we are grateful for the countless hours she has dedicated to this cause.

Incredible buffoon some would argue.  According to reports in various media outlets, she made quite the fool of herself by going on what some referred to as a ‘drunken late night rant’ on the Facebook page of Brown supporters and making some rather disparaging comments about not only Mr. Brown but also his first born child who is not involved in current litigation.  Her colleagues had the following to say about her:  

“It is rather unseemly for an officer of the court to be on Facebook at that hour—or any hour—arguing the facts on behalf of her ‘client’ who is not a party in this case,” observed a Washington, D.C.-based lawyer who works on Capitol Hill. “The serious practicing attorneys I know would never bother with that kind of thing. It’s just not appropriate. But it is pure comic gold. You can’t make this stuff up.”

5. Matt and Melanie objected to Angel Smith not because they don’t believe in Veronica’s best interests but because Veronica already has a GAL. The same GAL that represented Veronica at SCOTUS.

Their GAL or Guardian Ad Litem appointed in SC dealt with matters relating to SC.  Any involvement in the Supreme Court case was a direct result of the SC case and it’s appeal to the Supreme Court.  Any matter handled in the Oklahoma courts would be separate from any matter handled by South Carolina and therefore would require a new GAL in that state. 

There was also question in South Carolina proceedings regarding the fairness of or the ability to remain unbiased by the GAL there.  Reports indicate the SC GAL made little effort when looking into the biological family and showed little interest in reporting on their ability to care for Veronica.  She is alleged to have made comments regarding the culture in a manner that showed a lack of knowledge on her part, including remarks regarding ‘free lunches’ Native Americans get and ‘little dances’ they do. That seemed to be the sum total of her Native American cultural knowledge.  That would also seem to be a HUGE problem when a core issue of this case also involves the ability of a non-Native family to care for Veronica and bring her up within her culture. It would seem that the initial SC GAL would be preferred by the Capobiancos because she was squarely on their side.  

They are not just objecting to the GAL in Oklahoma though. Records posted to the online court records site for Oklahoma initially indicated they also opposed Veronica having her own attorney. Those records have now vanished in what appears to be a ‘media blackout’ by officials there.  So it would seem the Capobiancos are actually opposed to anyone they view as not being on their side or whose opinions they haven’t vetted in advance. 


6. The online store on saveveronica.org was removed once the case was accepted by the US Supreme Court and all the attorneys began working pro bono. There is nothing wrong with fund-raising for our friends. All-in-all around $30K was raised, which only scratched the surface of what they owed prior to the legal team working at no charge. Matt and Melanie have not ‘profited’ from this ordeal in any way.

We’ll refrain on this one and will only say that while they do claim their attorneys are working pro bono, as late as last week, posts regarding the sale of items benefiting the Capobiancos and/or their legal fund appear online.

7. TRIO has never received any money from the Capobiancos. Actually, it’s just the opposite. Several have spent their own money to support this cause.

No evidence to date shows any money from Trio Solutions going directly to the Capobiancos. 

8. Although there are documented facts concerning opponents, SaveVeronica will not stoop to that level with this cause. We can bring Veronica home on the merits of truth and justice.

Now this one may get lengthy. In some twisted ‘accuse the accuser’ sort of fashion, they have in fact been guilty of exactly that…stooping.  They have done quite a job though at being positive publicly.   Many of their supporters have taken the liberty of harassing Brown supporters privately including frivolous charges, allegations and suits along with threatening and abusive private messages. They’ve practically invented the book on planting false and negative ‘buzz’ around the Brown side.  One example would be the following as documented by an observer:

At some point, several of their supporters made statements claiming the hacktivist group Anonymous was getting involved in the case. It was said they were involving themselves and would be taking a look at the Brown supporter’s private emails and so forth to ‘expose their lies’.   After rumors of this circulated, in what appears to be an attempt to back up that claim, a local supporter then attended the OK press conference given by the Capobiancos dressed as Anonymous. They later then posted that picture as ‘proof’ Anonymous was actually involved. This all was tied into the creationby the same individuals of a supposed Anonymous video ridiculing Mr. Brown. Public statements by the real Anonymous group at the time stated that not only do they not make such ‘low brow’ videos but that they do not involve themselves in such ‘derpness’.  A close look at the history of the link posting on social networks sites showed that the video was initially circulated by fervent Capobianco supporters.

9. Dusten was aware of the adoption and even acknowledged Christy after he signed the paper.

Testimony by the birth mother found on this blog and others clearly shows that the birth mother testified under oath that she did this behind his back. She states he was not aware and that although she knew how to spell his name correctly, she didn’t inform officials of misspellings and made efforts to ensure the bio father was not made aware of the adoption. 

10. When he first filed for custody, Dusten said ‘he was not Native American.’ Then four months later, he amended the paperwork to say he was.

The first post here, entitled How Did We Get Here addresses this exact issue. Mr. Brown was not notified of the adoption until days before deploying to Iraq. He was working with an attorney out of Bartlesville, OK while he was stationed at Ft. Sill.  He was at a disadvantage both with regard to time and distance and hurriedly had to convey everything to the attorney in a short amount of time. The issue of him being Native American, it’s been said, is him playing the race card to his advantage yet now they claim him hiding it would have been to his advantage. The more plausible explanation is he was hurried and it was not addressed at that point.  Another issue with regard to this claim is that the Capobiancos and Miss Maldonado would also be obligated to notify everyone of the ethnicity of this child if they knew yet it seems they didn’t either.  Birth mother’s testimony reveals she claims to have told everyone yet also implies she worked diligently to avoid ICWA interference.  The burden was not solely on the father on this one and it’s plausible he forgot to mention it, she tried hard to avoid it and the Capobiancos just prayed it was never mentioned.  The tribe also never brought it up because they were falsely led to believe he was a different Dustin Brown and therefore, not enrolled.  Dredging through all that clutter took some time and once the dust settled and the facts presented themselves, his Indian heritage was clearly noted.

11. Dusten did not pay child support until V was 16 months old and then only sporadically and in relatively small amounts.

Like with anything else in this case, we may never know sadly. Common adoption world tactics include birth mothers not accepting payments in a way to later claim they were never given payment by men they then allege are dead beat fathers.  And as rumor has it, support was paid to the Capobiancos yet checks went uncashed so as to avoid any implication of Veronica being his daughter for which he was paying support.  They wanted to give the appearance of her being their daughter and as such, who would accept support from someone they claim had no right to the child.  A little adoption trickery but shown to be effective in many other cases to this point. 

12. Neither Dusten nor family ever reached out to Christy with offers of gifts, money, support, or crocheted beaded booties.

We doubt biological grandmother Alice Brown would have taken the time to do all this for the sole benefit of going blind although they are lovely. 

And again, time will tell.  It’s quite possible this information could come out at a later date. 

13. Christy never moved or changed her phone number despite Dusten’s claims that she “hid”. If she hid she did the worst job in the history of hiding considering she kept the same address, job, phone number, etc.

One need not move to avoid contact. One can simply not answer the phone or the door. Another common adoption world strategy by birth mothers and often adoption agencies will advise them to do this to cut a birth father out of the picture.  However, this also works in much the same fashion in reverse. For a woman so concerned about her child, he also remains in the same town and easily contacted.  So while birth mother claims to be so distraught that her open adoption has come to an end by Veronica being with her father, she’s made no attempt to contact or visit the child at all. In fact, her testimony shows she didn’t appear very concerned with contacting Veronica even from the beginning. She has only seen her once prior to all of this and once because by chance she happened to see her as a result of a court appearance. There have been zero reports to date of her other children having any contact with Veronica. 

14. The Charleston Family Court and the SC Supreme Court did not find that it was in Veronica’s best interest to be returned to her father. They were never allowed to consider best interest–only ICWA.

Birth father was found fit and loving and bio mother was found to be ‘not credible’ by the South Carolina Family Courts.  The judge’s words can also be found at the end of bio mother’s testimony. No court to date has ever questioned his ability to parent. 

15. Matt, Melanie, Christy, and family have NEVER asked for a dime. They are in constant awe of the generosity of their friends and supporters and are such classy people they fear they can never “repay” people.

They’ve sold everything from perfume to bracelets and bumper stickers. They’ve held auctions and other fundraisers to raise money for the Capobiancos. The Capobiancos have also paid Miss Madonado’s attorneys and travel. So while the Capobiancos or Maldonado may never have asked maybe, they certainly haven’t denied any contributions either. 

16. Matt and Mel didn’t surprise Dusten with service a few days before deploying as he claims. He ducked service for months likely thinking Christy was after him for child support.

Records state he was served by surprise.  No record in any court to date, no testimony and no official in this matter has ever implied he made any effort to avoid service. In fact, this is a completely recent fabrication on their part. 

17. Dusten knew about the adoption. If you see the screenshot of the text message it’s clear. He says it’s clear that you have thought about this, it’s not an easy decision.

The text messages were not admitted into evidence and it was noted they appeared to be incomplete and out of context.  They were deemed unreliable by the courts. 

18. Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare is NOT an anti-Indian racist organization. In fact, it is the exact opposite founded by a Native American father and his wife. They didn’t believe in ICWA and began advocating for Native American children. I believe that actually makes them pro-Indian.

We’ll leave it to readers to research.  Because it’s a matter of personal opinion, it’s obviously better left to the Native American community at large to say whether or not this agency has been racial or discriminatory.  It is rather presumptuous of a group of non-Natives to be the arbiter on this issue.

19. The cause was named ‘Save Veronica’ because at the time the group was trying to save her from being taken from her family and from her civil rights being violated. She had NO transition, taken from her Mommy and Daddy, put in a truck to never see them again. All because of a very small amount of Indian blood. It was wrong and we fought like hell to prove it. Thank you SCOTUS for confirming our belief.

The only portion of this worth addressing is the ‘no transition’ issue. Mr Brown was not the cause of this.  A transition was more than likely considered by the SC family courts but given the legal foot dragging on the part of the Capobiancos and given there were numerous prior rulings and prior motions including a stay filed by the Capobiancos, the courts thought it best that she be removed from them and given to Mr. Brown immediately. He certainly was in no position to go against or question that. 

Further, not only does the Cherokee Nation not consider blood quantum but it’s our feeling that to do so is insulting, again showing a lack of understanding of Veronica’s culture. 

20. The allegation that a transition plan was ordered and the Cs ignored it is not true. The original order was for V to be turned over at a certain date and time, NO TRANSITION. There was no “plan to meet at a park” that was thwarted by the sudden storm of media.

Our prior posts deal with this issue too. The Capobiancos created a circus-like atmosphere surrounding her transition. It was a scary situation for a child and certainly inappropriate.  Their supporters made it a tense, if not threatening situation at the invitation of Trio Solutions and their spokesperson, Jessica Munday.

21. Dusten was NOT overseas when he got behind on child support for his daughter with his ex-wife. He didn’t even join the military until after she took him to court for unpaid child support. This is probably obvious, but he was NOT in Iraq when V was born. He was served with papers about the adoption in Oklahoma when she was 4 months old.

Dusten’s relationship with his other child and any support issues stemming from that are not the concern of current litigation. It’s unfortunate that they continue to drag his other child into this and cause harm to her as well.  Not satisfied with harming one child, somehow two is better seems to be the logic behind this.  His ex-wife has stated that he is loving father and there are no issues between them. She has shown her firm support of him as well.  That should be the end of this matter.

22. ‘IndianCountryToday’ is similar to the “National Enquirer” in its reputation for salacious reporting. They have appeared biased in several reports and often cite “sources off the record” when asserting a fact that ethically requires a cite. When the opposition uses it as a reference, you can ask them to cite a more reputable record.

Miss Brewer is an investigative journalist doing her job. You can be assured that given her journalistic integrity and reporting history, if Miss Brewer has deemed a story news-worthy, that she has gone on to check and double check her facts. Not only that but most media outlets have a legal department who would never risk the publication’s reputation on something that couldn’t be proven. We need not trash her.  When media was in the Capobiancos favor it was wonderful reporting and fair. When not in their favor, it’s a bunch of horrid, trashy rags.   In checking into the Indian Country Today publication, one can see they are part of a much larger media group with more than extensive and reliable credentials. 

23. Regarding the misspelling of Dusten’s name. a) He misspelled Christy’s name in the pleading he filed in Oklahoma b) He spells HIS OWN NAME three different ways: Dusten, Dustin, Dustan. c) He goes by Dusty d) his ex-wife has spelled it Dustin.

Regardless of if he spelled his name E-L-M-O, birth mother’s testimony now clearly shows her admission that she knew how to spell his name and worked diligently to keep him unaware of the adoption. 

24. Although Dusten was deployed for a year (January 2010 – December 2010) AND V. had been born AND Dusten had filed his suit seeking custody, Dusten came home in August for a few weeks and never tried to contact V in any way. No calls, no letters, no offers to visit.

Although they claim the adoption is open and present themselves as open to contact, the truth is, they never reached out to Mr. Brown and rejected any attempts at communication from him.   And, after Veronica was transferred to her father, they feigned shock that he wouldn’t then allow them communication although initially he did permit their calls. Given they sought out media attention, Mr. Brown’s reaction would is justified in protecting Veronica. The Capobiancos were the first to lay the groundwork for what has become no communications/no relations between the parties. 

25. Regarding the ICPC form and the circling of the word “Hispanic” and whether that was a deliberate attempt to get around ICWA. The form was fill in the blank and all three races were provided, white, Hispanic, Native American. Hispanic was circled, not by Christy. Why? It is possible the clerk circled the mother’s race since she’s the only one there.

According to her testimony, birth mother had no knowledge of how this happened. However, given her less than truthful nature and several attempts to impeach her, readers would be well advised to take this with a grain of salt.

26. The ICPC is a binding enforceable contract between two states when a child has the approval to be placed with a family in another state. Children cannot be placed in another state without this approval. The purpose is to protect the child and the states involved in interstate placement of children so that

(1) The child is placed in a suitable environment,

(2) The receiving state can make sure the placement is in the best interest of the child,

(3) The sending state can evaluate the proposed placement,

(4) The care of the child is mandated by court arrangements, and

(5) The child has legal and financial protection.

Most of this with respect to ICPC may be true in fact but not true in practice. As we see in the Baby Deserai case and others, ICPC documentation can be and is often circumvented or missing.  In fact, the punishment for lying on ICPC forms or thwarting ICPC rules is often that the adoption is not granted. However, this is rarely enforced and adoptive couples and adoption agencies get little more than a slap on the wrist only encouraging them to continue to circumvent it. After all, the reward of a baby at the end is more than enough incentive to move forward with an adoption no matter how unethical, at all cost.