Supplementary Brief for the Return of John Smith's Children* Below is the cover, the motion for leave (permission) to file the supplementary brief, the very brief brief itself, and  some important attorney-client fee agreements and billing tips.

JOHN SMITH taped the children disclosing sexual abuse.   He said the children were at risk from further sexual abuse. POCAHONTAS and her lawyer said he coached and led the children to lie.   She said the children were at risk from further manipulation by JOHN. The children are at risk.  The lower court and the single-justice sessions did nothing.  The lower court did not even let him take the stand and testify!!!   To get over the hurdles of the family court's judicial incompetence and the "middle" courts'  judicial apathy, JOHN engaged a forensic linguist and perhaps the world's foremost expert on children's language development to analyze the tape.  The doctor has determined the children were neither coached nor led.   They were telling the truth.     We hope that Massachusetts' highest court will act to reverse the unlawful removal**of the children to State XXXX without JOHN's consent, without an evidentiary hearing, and without any investigation as to where the children were being brought . . . despite his having warned the albeit imcompetent guardian ad litem of the dysfunctionality of the mother's family.  **John Smith had a different lawyer when this unlawfulness occurred.  That lawyer is associated with one of the most famous of all matrimonial lawfirms in Boston.   CAVEAT EMPTOR -- BUYER BEWARE Proceed with caution when hiring the well-known firms: (1) read the contract they ask you to sign, (2) call the Bar association, (3) compare the contract you were given with that recommended by the Bar, (4) do not sign a one-sided contract, no matter how desperate you are for a lawyer, (5) find out who they will assign to your case, (6) insist on itemized billing, that is, that what was done be specified on the bill. The BIG or SMALLER WELL-KNOWN lawfirms are doing what I call "TIER-BILLING."  Tier-billing is when the associate assigned to you asks Jane, John, Bill, Dick, Alice, Betty, and the Big Honcho a question or two.  You are then billed for the same 15 minutes by anywhere from 2 to as many as 5 people, whose rates might range from $125 to $375 an hour.   That means that you might end up with being billed as much as $1000 for the hour . . . and you will find nothing in their file which reveals what was discussed.   They might have just been schmoozing over donuts and coffee.


 

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT  ______________________________________________ SUFFOLK, SS. CASE NO. ______  ______________________________________________     JOHN SMITH  Plaintiff/Appellant v. POCAHONTAS SMITH,  SUFFOLK COUNTY DIVISION OF THE  PROBATE & FAMILY DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT  Defendants/Appellees   __________________________________________________   CONSOLIDATED -- TWO SJC RULE 2:21 APPEALS  Appeals from Judgments and Orders of  Suffolk Probate & Family Court,  No. ______________ Appeals Court Single-Justice Session, Nos. 2001-J-0000 and 2001-J-0000  Supreme Judicial Court Single-Justice Session  Nos. 2001-0000 and 2001-0000 __________________________________________________   SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF JOHN SMITH  PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT __________________________________________________       Barbara C. Johnson 6 Appletree Lane  Andover, MA 01810-4102 978-474-0833  Attorney for JOHN SMITH  Plaintiff/Appellant

This is the back cover   CASE NO. SJC-_______     JOHN SMITH  Plaintiff/Appellant   v.   POCAHONTAS SMITH,  SUFFOLK COUNTY DIVISION OF THE  PROBATE & FAMILY DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT Defendants/Appellees   __________________________________________________   CONSOLIDATED -- TWO SJC RULE 2:21 APPEALS  Appeals from Judgments and Orders of  Suffolk Probate & Family Court,  No. ______________ Appeals Court Single-Justice Session, Nos. 2001-J-0000 and 2001-J-0000  Supreme Judicial Court Single-Justice Session  Nos. 2001-0000 and 2001-0000 __________________________________________________   SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF JOHN SMITH  PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT __________________________________________________   SUFFOLK, SS.


 

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT SUFFOLK COUNTY, ss.                                                    C.A. NO. SJC- _____________________________________ JOHN SMITH                               Plaintiff/Appellant  v. POCAHONTAS SMITH and Suffolk County Probate & Family Court                                Defendants/Appellees  _____________________________________     APPELLANT'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT BRIEF ON WRIT OF MANDAMUS  FOR VACATION OF ORDER ALLOWING REMOVAL OF CHILDREN TO STATE of XXXX AND FOR ORDER TO RETURN OF CHILDREN  TO FATHER'S CUSTODY IN MASSACHUSETTS  ________________________________________ Now comes Plaintiff/Appellant JOHN SMITH ["SMITH"] and moves to supplement his brief in which he seeks (1) an order vacating the order allowing the removal of the children to the State of XXXX, where they reside with their mother, the defendant wife, and their maternal grandfather, and (2) an order returning them to Massachusetts into SMITH's custody. Both twins disclosed -- on audio tape -- that they witnessed their mother having intercourse with a male. And one of the twins has accused -- on audio tape -- the maternal grandfather of sodomizing him. In support of this motion, SMITH states that he has new evidence, i.e., evidence from Dr. _______, a forensic linguist who is perhaps the world's foremost authority on children's language development. Dr. ____________ has analyzed the tape on which the twins made disclosures of sexual abuse if they are allowed to remain in XXXX.  She concluded that the children were not coached or lead by their father, SMITH, in making their disclosures.  The only conclusions possible are that the children were truthful and that they are in danger of continuing sexual abuse if they are allowed to remain in XXXX. Her detailed report as well as her notations on the transcript of the tape are attached to the Supplemental Brief, which accompanies this motion. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this motion to supplement be allowed.   Respectfully submitted, DEFENDANT JOHN SMITH,  By his attorney,  Barbara C. Johnson 1 August 2001                Barbara C. Johnson, Esq.                                           6 Appletree Lane                                           Andover, MA 01810-4102                                           978-474-0833     CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara C. Johnson, counsel for JOHN SMITH, hereby certify that on a 2 August  2001 I served by first-class mail a true and accurate copy of the within pleading on , E.Chouteau Merrill, Esq., _____ ; Clerk of Suffolk County Probate & Family Court, 24 New Chardon Street, P.O. Box 9667, Boston, MA 02108; and Attorney General, Administrative Law Division, One Ashburton Place, Room 2019, Boston, MA 02108. 2 August 2001                  Barbara C. Johnson

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT SUFFOLK COUNTY, ss.                                                    C.A. NO. SJC- _____________________________________ JOHN SMITH                                                   Plaintiff/Appellant  v. POCAHONTAS SMITH and Suffolk County Probate & Family Court                                           Defendants/Appellees  _____________________________________   APPELLANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF ON WRIT OF MANDAMUS  FOR VACATION OF ORDER ALLOWING REMOVAL OF CHILDREN TO STATE OF XXXX AND FOR ORDER TO RETURN OF CHILDREN  TO FATHER'S CUSTODY IN MASSACHUSETTS  ________________________________________ Now comes Plaintiff/Appellant JOHN SMITH ["SMITH"] and submits his supplemental brief in which he seeks (1) an order vacating the order allowing the removal of the children to the State of XXXX, where they reside with their mother, the defendant wife, and their maternal grandfather, and (2) an order returning them to Massachusetts into SMITH's custody. Both twins disclosed -- on audio tape -- that they witnessed their mother having intercourse with a male. And one of the twins has accused -- on audio tape -- the maternal grandfather of sodomizing him. SMITH states that he has new evidence, i.e., evidence from Dr. ___________, a forensic linguist who is perhaps the world's foremost authority on children's language development. (See attached curriculum vitae.) Dr. ___________ has analyzed the tape on which the twins made disclosures of sexual abuse. She concluded that the children were not coached or lead by their father, SMITH, in making their disclosures.  The only conclusions possible are that the children were truthful and that they are in danger of continuing sexual abuse if they are allowed to remain in XXXX. Her detailed report as well as her notations on the transcript of the tape are attached to this Supplemental Brief. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court declare that the order allowing the removal of the children to the State of XXXX be vacated and that SMITH's children be returned forthwith to Massachusetts into SMITH's custody.  Respectfully submitted, DEFENDANT JOHN SMITH,  By his attorney,  Barbara C. Johnson 1 August 2001                    Barbara C. Johnson, Esq.                                           6 Appletree Lane                                           Andover, MA 01810-4102                                           978-474-0833     CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Barbara C. Johnson, counsel for JOHN SMITH, hereby certify that on a 2 August  2001 I served by first-class mail a true and accurate copy of the within pleading on , E.Chouteau Merrill, Esq., _____ ; Clerk of Suffolk County Probate & Family Court, 24 New Chardon Street, P.O. Box 9667, Boston, MA 02108; and Attorney General, Administrative Law Division, One Ashburton Place, Room 2019, Boston, MA 02108. 2 August 2001                  Barbara C. Johnson