Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Psychologist testimony

Psychologist Ken Perlmutter did a child custody evaluation for the court in my case, and here is how his court testimony began last month:
AngryDad: Okay. Mr. Perlmutter, were you paid $28,000 for your
work in this case?

Permutter: That's an approximate total. Would you like an exact

AngryDad: No. That's good enough.
Until the accusations that resulted in your
appointment, [AngryMom] and I shared 50/50 joint custody --

Permutter: Could I go back one second? There might be a
significant error there. You said that I charged $28,000?

AngryDad: I said you were paid about $28,000 for your work in
this case.

Permutter: That's incorrect.

AngryDad: Okay. How much were you paid?

Permutter: As you know, you were responsible for advancing the
fees for the evaluation. And during the course of the
evaluation you made three payments. The first was for
$6,000. The second was for $6,000. The third was for
$7,350. The total is $19,350.

AngryDad: And how much initial money have you been paid --

Permutter: It's a total --

AngryDad: -- since then?

Permutter: From you?

AngryDad: No. How much have you been paid?

Permutter: I've been paid the fees from [AngryMom] for my appearance
at court last time and today. As you also know, you
refused to pay my deposition at my deposition. And I
believe the Court made an order that [AngryMom] was to pay
that. So that was another thing that [AngryMom] paid. I can
tell you --

AngryDad: Excuse me. I'm asking you what you know. Do you
know how much money you were paid?

Permutter: I'm going to tell you the additional payments that
you made in your case.
Since your initial completion of the evaluation --

Permutter: I apologize, your Honor. I did
not add these up in advance.

THE COURT: That's fine.

Permutter: So since the release of the
report, I have -- and the three payments that I noted that
you made, I have received three payments from [AngryMom]. One
was for $1,800. The other was for $4,500. And the other
was for $2,250. And a quick total of that is $8,550.

AngryDad: So total amount you were paid was about $28,000?

Permutter: If you would like me to add those up, then I will.
The total that I get is $27,900.

AngryDad: Thank you.
Until the accusations that resulted in your
appointment, [AngryMom] and I shared 50/50 joint custody. Is
that correct?

AngryMom: Objection; he's -- I just take
note that he's assuming -- he's stating -- "the accusation
that resulted in your appointment" is not an accurate
description of the history of the case. And so, I object
to the form of the question. He's assuming -- it's

AngryDad: I'm asking if it's a correct
statement. If it's not correct, you can say it's not

THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer.

Permutter: I don't know the answer to that
question. I talk about the questions that I had about my
understanding of the record in the report. And I
understand your theory that up until the time that the
recommended order that I made was signed into an order by
Commissioner Joseph, I understand that you believed that
you had joint legal and physical custody. And I certainly
understand why you think that's the case. And I know that
I'm not competent to make the decision about the reality
of that.
Is this pathetic or not? He took $28k for the case, but is confused about the amount. When asked the simplest question about our custody situation, he starts pleading incompetence. If you were doing a $28k child custody evaluation, I would expect you to first determine the current custody determination, and to be able to testify about it.

If he does not understand the simplest things about the case history, how could his recommendations possibly have any merit?


Anonymous said...

Did you hire a court reporter for your hearing? If so, was it expensive?

George said...

Yes. The fee was $770.

Anonymous said...

Ouch... but worth it.

Anonymous said...

ok..You got 2 out of 4. Perlmutter wanted you to also rant about his bias against you too, and how despite the court ordering that your ex pay only $8550 of the $28,000, he was hostile towards YOU about WHERE his $28,000 came from.

Wasn't bad enough that he was PAID, $28000 and he was incompetent. He was biased vs. you, too, and you paid him 70%. Of course if you did call him on this, it would also sound like you wanted the bias in your favor 'cause you paid for most of what he received. it's always a catch 22.

Go back and take a look at how he tried to bait you into writing about this as well.

the part about wait a minute, there might be a significant error about the 28000, then it turns out it is 28000, so he has to give a breakdown about you refusing to pay for the deposition...

"You were paid about 28,000." "That's incorrect."
He has to add it up and it comes to $27,900. you were supposed to get angry over this b.s. too.

Don't you figure his INTENT was to piss you off and have you screaming bloody murder about him and the "court system" being crooked as much as possible ?

i think you missed a couple here, george.

George said...

I was only annoyed at having to waste time in court on what should have been a 30-second question and answer. I had many other questions. I do not think that he did it deliberately, because he looked like a fool.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, i'm on your side, here, but the guy pockets $28,000, and does nothing but a few hours of sleazy b.s.and he's a fool ? I look at him as a charlatan.

Like i said, go back and look at exactly what he said, and how he went about it ?

It was malicious. Calculated.

I think it's all deliberate. He wants to look like a fool. He wants you to make him look like a fool, too.

Did he say a single thing that WASN'T FOOLISH ? To me, when someone makes a quick $28,000, they're not a fool, they're a crook.

also..because of what he said and did, you didn't discuss your kids, etc..you discussed what HE wanted.
He was able to obfuscate and obscure the real issues. Next time, don't ask anyone anything other than your kids. i don't fault you. You just asked a simple question, but it permitted him to stray, and direct the conversation.

I'd love to tell you differently, but haven't you proven that all of these evaluators end up taking a lot of money and looking like fools, just to see the next one do the same thing ?

I see him as competent. A very competent crook, that is His reviews are terrible. He's listed as a "whore of the court" in san mateo county. He's also a MORTGAGE BROKER...Figure he's ever lied about anything to make money on anything else ?

I wish the best for you and your kids. It's criminal what they're doing to your family.

Anonymous said...

Re Anonymous posting at 2:06, did a quick check and the mortgage broker is a different Perlmutter. Based in Chicago and an engineer by training. Enjoying your comments, though, I think your insights helpful. Navigating the same court w/the same cast of crooks as George (not Perlmutter though, different charlatan in my case) so it's appreciated. You can't win in this system if you go along with them, you can't win if you challenge them. We have a broken judicial system and not just in family court.

George said...

I cannot really explain how this psychologist is able to get away what he is doing. Your explanation is as good as mine. I will post some more testimony tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

SORRY..I jumped the gun about him being a mortgage broker. He is listed a "court whore" in San Mateo.

Anyway, what's george to do ? You say
that you can win by going along with them. How can george begin to go along with them, now ?

Anonymous said...

amen re listing as "court whore". Your observations are spot on how Perlmutter and his ilk work in court, have seen it myself many times.

No, sorry, I said you "can't win" by going along w/them because you admit you were wrong in the first place. You go through court-ordered (by the ex-spouse's request) "rehabilitation" and "re-education" and then likely you get to see your kids again. Trouble is you now have a permanent "black mark" against you in the system. So the vindictive ex is able to cry wolf once again and the heroes of the court system ride in with their shining armor on white horses to her emotional rescue once again (apologies to Mick and Keith) and then you're really screwed. Happened to me.

So what I'm trying to say it's a Catch-22 for most of the dads in this system, you lose either way. The whole system needs an overhaul, or a serious mauling. From a societal and political viewpoint I see no real critical mass in changing things back to a more realistic equilibrium for moms and dads and the kids. I see and read a number of things, meet a lot of affected people, but there's not enough force at the moment to change the way it is right now. I've come to my own conclusions, based on historical precident for what's worked in somewhat comparable situations as to what would work if people decided RIGHT NOW. But they are unpalatable to most people and have been shot down in this blog site before so I'll spare you. I wish I had better news or a civilized suggestion that I think would work w/in the system. But I'm afraid things have gone too far for that unless there's a more serious groundswell and that takes a lot of time. Too long to affect those of us already affected by this system.

Anonymous said...

Sorry again. I agree that's there's no way to win. The term "whores of the court" may be taken from Margaret Hagen's book, "whores of the court".

You can beat them by leaving, sort of. As i was being "set up by the psychologist and court and lawyer" as my daughter warned me, she and I jointly decided it would be best if I left till she turned 18.

We have a great relationship, although i never see her. She's angry and afraid of mom, but that was the case before I left ,too.

She's an A student, on many teams, an accomplished musician, and has a lot of friends, etc.

She nor I have ever been subjected to the psychologist, evaluators in S.C., although we're familiar with what they do and who they are. They're all the same.

God bless george, for doing what he can for his kids, and also for his writing that help dads, and hopefully their kids, too. huh ?