STATE OF MAINE DISTRICT COURT CUMBERLAND, SS DISTRICT IX Civil Action DIVISION OF SOUTHERN CUMBERLAND Docket No. PORDC-FM-08-510 —) IGOR MALENKO LORI MAY HANDRAHAN BEFORE: ‘The Honorable Jeffrey Moskowitz, Judge of the District Court, in Portland, Maine, on Friday, January 14, 2011. APPEARANCES: Michael Waxman, Esq. For the Plaintiff Elizabeth Hoffman, Esq. For the Defendant Co, py y OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT Prepared by the Electronic Recording DivisionWIINEs Lori Handrahan Igor Malenko amy Hayes Susan Scherbel Lori Handrehan (Recalled) EXHIBITS Plaintiff's #58 (email) Plaintiff’s 59 (email) Plaintiff's #61 (email) Plaintiff's #60 (email) Plaintiff's #51 (email) Plaintiff's #49 (email) Plaintiff's #57 (videotape) Defendant's #1 (hire letter) Defendant’s #2 (school letter) Plaintiff's #56 (photos) Plaintiff's #54 (tax return) Plaintiff's #55 (photo) INDEX OF WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT —_ RECROSS 10 52 67 - or 97 109 14 128 -- -- -- 131 -- — - 135 142 164 -- INDEX OF EXHIBITS MARKED OFFERED ADMITTED 13 14 a5 18 19 - 21 21 22 38 39 -- 39 40 40 42 42 42 50 51 51 60 60 60 63 63 63 84 a4 84 122 122 122 123 123 12310 a 12 13 14 15 16 47 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (This matter came for hearing before The Honorable Jeffrey Moskowitz, Judge of the District Court, at the District Courthouse in Portland, Maine, on Friday, January 14, 2011.) COURT: Okay. This is FM-08-510, the matter of Igor Malenko and Lori Handrahan. We’re here on, essentially, a motion to modify with regard to the issue of relocation that has been framed for the Court with regard to various--a flurry of recent motions that have been filed, as well as past motions that have been filed. There are a couple of preliminary matters that we need to take up. That is, right at the outset, the first matter I think the first matter we need to take up is Attorney Hoffman’s motion to withdraw. Present, I should add, is Mr. Malenko, along with Mr. waxan, who's his lawyer, as well as Dr. Handrahan and Ms, Hoffman, her attorney. Ms. Hoffman, you have a motion to withdraw, and I suspect we need to take that up as the first order of business. ELIZABETH HOFFMAN, ESQ.: I do have a motion to withdraw. COURT: Okay. The motion doesn’t specify any particular xeason, other than it suggests that the Court may want to conduct an in camera inquiry. MS. HOFFMAN: That‘s correct. If you would like to have additional information, I would request a chambers conference. COURT: Okay. I’m happy to do an in camera inquiry, but I10 al 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 think we need to do it on the record, I think it’s safest to do that on the record in this case, which I'm happy to do. So what we would essentially have to do, since we have no capability of recording what happens in chambers, we’ll have to clear the courtroom, and I can meet with you privately, with respect to your motion. MS, HOFFMAN: Thank you. couRT: So why don’t T invite everyone else who's not connected with the motion to withdraw to please leave the courtroom, (Pause) COURT: Mr. Waxman, I think that means you and Mr. Malenko as well, MICHAEL WAXMAN, ESQ.: Okay. At what point would I be able to offer my position on the withdrawal motion? COURT: Well, Ms. Hoffman suggests that the Court needs to take this up in camera. I assume that means that she has things to say that may relate to the attorney/client communications and other things. I have no idea what it’s about, but I assume it has to do with things that you're not supposed to be privy to. So I’m going to ask you and Mr. Malenko to leave the courtroom. MR, WAXMAN: All right. COURT: Thank you. (Pause)10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COURT: Okay. The record should reflect that the only folks present in the courtroom are Ms. Hoffman, myself and Marshall Bridding [phonetic], who’s accompanying us, Ms. Hoffman? MS. HOFFMAN: I did call the court yesterday to request a hearing on this, prior to today’s hearing. I am willing to continue with this hearing today, but I guess I would just say that communication has broken down between myself and my client. and we disagree about the strategy for the case, and I feel like I can’t represent her interests any longer going forward, -- COURT: I see. MS. HOFFMAN: --based on our relationship. COURT: That's somewhat different from what I anticipated, but-- MS. HOFFMAN: I-~ COURT: “not necessarily--okay. I understand completely. MS. HOFFMAN: Sure. And I can provide the Court more information but-- COURT: That won't be necessary. I appreciate your willingness to stay on board for this morning, for this hearing. I know you've moved heaven and earth to get here. I was aware of what happened this past week. Ms. Green let me know, and I appreciate that very much. This is a case that we need to--we simply need to have a hearing this morning on,a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 au 22 23 24 25 because it's really the only amount of time we could carve out of a very busy court schedule, in a case that really is-- really needs to have a hearing today. $o I appreciate your efforts to move heaven and earth to be here. MS. HOFFMAN: Thank you. COURT: And the fact that you remain on board for this morning as well. So if you'd like to renew your motion to withdraw after this morning’s hearing is finished, I’m happy to grant it. MS. HOFFMAN: Okay. Thank you. COURT: You're welcome. Bruce, may we call the rest of the folks back in? COURT OFFICER: Want me to shut this off for a second? COURT: Sure. MACHINE OFF - MACHINE ON COURT: All right. We’re back on the record in FM-08-510. After the conversation that I’ve had with Ms. Hoffman in camera, I will be granting her motion to withdraw as counsel, after the close of the hearing today. She has agreed to remain as counsel for Dr. Handrahan for the remainder of this morning, until the close of the hearing. And I will be granting the motion to withdraw as counsel after the hearing is over. Ms. Hoffman has just handed the Court a child support affidavit dated 1/14/11 from Dr. Handrahan, as well as a child support worksheet that was prepared by Ms. Hoffman. 110 1 12 3 14 24 25 have that here. We have about three hours to conduct this hearing. And so what I intend to do is I intend to allow Plaintiff to present Plaintiff's evidence between now and ten twenty-five. And then at ten twenty-five Dr. Handrahan, through Ms. Hoffman, will have an opportunity to present evidence, up until noon. I have to leave at noon, and I know other folks have to leave at noon as well. So we will end the hearing at twelve noon, no later than that. So without further adieu, Mr. Waxman? MR. WAXMAN: Yes, Your Honor, but first could we please have a sequestration order for those witnesses who are going to be testifying today? Any objection, Ms. Hoffman? MS. HOFFMAN: No. COURT: Okay. That motion is granted. A sequestration-- are there any witnesses, counsel indicate, who are not in the courtroom, who you expect to testify? Mr. Waxman? MR, WAXMAN: None for me. COURT: Ms. Hoffman? MS. HOFFMAN: No. COURT: All right. And are there folks in the courtroom that are going to be testifying, aside from the parties? MS. HOFFMAN: Yes. COURT: Okay. Folks, if you are possibly going to be a witness, I’ve just granted a request to sequester witnesses.10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 That means that folks that may testify in this case, not necessarily definitely but may testify in this case, have to be outside of the courtroom, of course, with the exception of the two parties. And they have to be outside of the courtroom at all times unless, of course, they’re testifying themselves, in which case, obviously, they’re on the witness stand. The motion to sequester that I’ve granted also means that--and the order means that when you're in the courtroom testifying, obviously you're going to hear what’s happening in the courtroom. When you're outside of the courtroom, after you/re finished, you're not allowed to speak about what happened in the courtroom with any other person until this hearing is finished. So it means that you have to be outside of the courtroom unless you're testifying, and then when you're outside of the courtroom, you can’t speak about what happened while you were here with anyone. Does that make sense to everybody? “Does anybody have any questions about that? very good. So I'd invite all folks who may be witnesses to please have a seat outside, and we'll call for you as you're needed. Thank you very much. MS. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, would it be possible for an expert witness in this case to remain in the courtroom? I did not object but-- COURT: Mr. Waxman? MR. WAXMAN: I have no prior knowledge of an experta oe ww 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a1 22 23 24 25 witness being brought to court. I guess I/d have to understand, what kind of expert she is and what--how she’d be helped by hearing the testimony. MS. HOFFMAN: She is a--she has a PhD in developmental psychology, and would benefit from hearing the testimony, because she has expert knowledge of relocation and hearing testimony from Mr. Malenko or whoever. MR, WAXMAN: Well, I object to this kind of witness being called, in any event, in this hearing, at the last minute with no advance notice to me. I don‘t have any expert witnesses. It’s just a fact-based determination the Court has to make, in any event, based on the best interest factors. So I object to that witness testifying, in any event. And I don’t understand how her knowledge, even if she were able to testify, is impacted at all by the facts as they’re--as they come in through the witnesses. COURT: Okay. The request for the witness to remain in the courtroom during the testimony is denied. whether the witness is allowed to testify in the future, we’ll have to get to that when the witness is proffered. So that witness ought to have a seat outside the courtroom. Mr. waxman? MR. WAXMAN: I'd call the Defendant to the stand, please. (Pause) COURT OFFICER: Stand right here, please, ma’am. Face the Court, and raise your right hand.os 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COURT: Dr. Handrahan, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll present in court today will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? will WITNWEss: I do. CouRT: Thank you, ma’am. Please have a seat. MR. WAXMAN: Good Morning, Doctor. COURT: Mr. Waxman? LORI HANDRAHAN, HAVING BEEN DULY SWORN, TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS, DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. WAXMAN Good morning, Dr. Handrahan. Do you prefer to be addressed as Dr. Handrahan or Miss Handrahan? It makes no difference to me, Mr. Waxman, The doctor is because you received a doctorate from the London School of Economics and Political science and Sociology, correct? Correct. We can agree, can’t we, that’s one of the finer institutions of learning in the world? It’s a highly recognized institution. Okay. Could you please speak up so the record gets picked up by the microphone? COURT: I--I--if there’s a problem we’1l--I'm sure Toni let us know. WITNESS: Yes. MR. WAXMAN: All right. 1010 cee 12 13 14 15 16 aq 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN And what state did you grow up in? A I grew up in Maine until the time of eighteen. Q Okay. In the last week or so you sent out at least four emails to the president of the Maine state Bar Association, to Governor LePage’s office, highly critical of me, Mr. Malenko and Mr. ~~ MS. HOFFMAN: Objection, what’s the question? MR. WAXMAN: I’m asking a question COURT: Okay. Let’s let Mr. Waxman finish the question. ‘Then we'll take--we’ll take the objection before the answer. Go ahead. MR. WAXMAN: You sent at least four emails in the last week to Maine State Bar Association, and to Governor LePage’s Office and others, highly critical of Michael waxman, Igor Malenko and Judge Jeff Moskowitz, have you not? There's an objection; basis? MS. HOFFMAN: I would object to the relevance. COURT: How is this relevant? MR. WAXMAN: It goes directly to the state of mind of this witness, Your Honor. When you see these emails, which are admissions by a party opponent, you will understand this woman is losing touch with reality, and has no business-- COURT: Okay. Now let me just stop the proceedings right now. The vitriol in this case is--I've only been a judge for 110 a 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 a 22 23 24 25 a little over two years. But the vitriol in this case is unprecedented, as far as I’m concerned, It’s out of control and out of hand. I won‘t stand for it anymore from either side. It’s really--it’s really gotten out of control, and it really detracts from the Court’s ability to sort through these very difficult issues. I'm going to ask that any characterization like that you refrain from making those kinds of characterizations, Mr, Waxman. MR. WAXMAN: My apologies. COURT: Apology accepted, but I'm going to demand that those kinds of characterizations stop. The evidence will speak for itself. It has in the past. It will in the future, and I’m going to ask that folks be as civil as they possibly can with each other in this case MR. WAXMAN: Got it. COURT: Okay? Does that make sense from everyone's perspective? MR. WAXMAN: Yes. COURT: Very good. So the objection is relevance. Mr. Waxman indicates that the emails may shed light on Dr. Handrahan’s state of mind with regard to the issues. So the objection’s overruled. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR, WAXMAN Q So have you sent such emails in the last week? A I have sent some emails in the last week. I don’t know 12awa w 4. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 which emails you're referring to, because I haven't seen the-- All right. --ones that you're referring to. MR, WAXMAN: May I approach the witness, Your Honor? courT: Yes. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN I’m showing you what I’ve marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 58 for identification. Would you please look at that, and tell us what it is. Not the content, but just what it is. Well, this is an email to the Bar, talking about meetings that I had had with Dateline and Nightline. Okay, All right. That’s an email that you authored, correct? And it’s also an email that I/d written to the lawyer for Westport Insurance Company, Well, we’ll get to that. -who had brought malpractice against Michael Waxman by James Cummings, and I thought you and Westport Insurance might be interested in the conversations I had with James Cummings. Ma‘ am, -— Are you aware that a letter-- COURT: Okay, Dr. Handrahan, you need to-- 13wae wn 10 a 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 1g 20 21 22 23 24 25 WITNESS: I thought I was supposed to-- COURT: --confine your-- WITNESS: --read this. COURT: Ma‘am, you need to confine your answers to just the questions. WITNESS: Okay. COURT: Your attorney will have, obviously, an opportunity to cross examine as well-- WITNESS: Okay. MR. WAXMAN; All right. That-- COURT: --and to follow up on anything that she thinks is appropriate. WITNESS: Okay. COURT: Mr. Waxman? MR. WAXMAN: That may have been my mistake. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q I’m just trying to identify what the document is, Dr. Handrahan, so that we can admit it into evidence. and am I correct that it’s an email authored by you to various people? A Yes. MR, WAXMAN: I'd like to move the admission of Bxhibit 58. You’ve got a copy of your-- MS. HOFFMAN: I have not had the opportunity to completely review this yet. 1410 qi 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COURT: Okay. Why don’t you take a moment to look at it, Ms. Hoffman. (Pause) MS. HOFFMAN: I would object to its relevance to the relocation. COURT: Okay. This is an email Dr, Waxman--Dr. Hanérahan indicated she wrote it to the Bar, if I remember her testimony just now, MR. WAXMAN: It’s to various people, as a matter of fact, Your Honor. . It’s to about six or seven different people, including Dateline NBC and various people. It concerns--well it’s relevant because it shows her state of mind, and her capacity to function as a--in a co-parenting manner in this case. COURT: Okay. On that limited basis, we'll admit the Plaintiffs 58. MR. WAXMAN: All right. You can keep that copy. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAKMAN QT just want to ask you a few questions about this particular document. The first number of names at the top, Who Law [phonetic] is David Wakeman. Who is the president of the Maine State Bar Association, right? A Right. Q And A. Story is the incoming president of the Maine state Bar Association, right? 15eee 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 25 op Oo PO Dy That's correct. James R. Marsh is a lawyer who practices in Washington, D.C. and New York, who is well known for defending or taking on cases on behalf of children who have been harmed, correct? Correct. Patricia Kahn [phonetic] then is a family law attorney in the New York area, right? No. No? Who is she? She works for Governor LePage. Oh, okay. And B. Davis at Preti Flaherty; who's that? She's a lawyer at Preti Flaherty. Is she on the Maine Board of Governors for the Maine State Bar Association? I’m not sure. Why did you send this to her? Because she’s been involved in the case, off and on, watching and observing. Okay. Sally Grinatstein [phonetic] at NBC Universal; who's that? She a producer for Dateline. Okay. and Roxanna 2. Sherwood [phonetic] at ABC.com; who's that? She’s a producer for Nightline. 16oe wow es 10 a 12 13 14 is 16 aq 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 oP OP OD Okay. And you've indicated here in the second paragraph, that you have meetings with producers from both Dateline and Nightline in the next weeks, as they consider investigations into how Waxman has been allowed to do what he has done, and continues to do, to me and my four year [sic] daughter. What are these meetings scheduled? Oh, I already had them. Oh, you had then already? ‘Milam Okay. And they’re going to run, stories? I’m not sure. Okay. And then below you have another email to Jeffrey Thayler [phonetic], who was the attorney for an insurance company--my insurance company actually--who paid a claim by James Cummings back in, I think, 2002, is that right? I'm not sure, Oh, you found this information by what, getting on the internet and looking for Michael Waxman and finding articles about me? COURT: Okay. I’m going to interject now. I’ve read through Plaintiff's 58. It really does not add a whole lot to what I need to determine today. I understand that there’s-- this is a high--to say this is a highly contentious case is an extreme understatement, It has been from the very beginning, I hope it won't continue to be, but it may. But let‘s move on 17aw 10 1 12 13 1a 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to some other topic now. I understand that there’s--1 understand that there are hard feelings on both sides. MR. WAXMAN: Okay. COURT: It’s very clear to me there are. Unfortunately, that's the nature of what we're dealing with. Let's move on. ‘MR, WAXMAN: Okay. I just have a couple more questions, Your Honor. You can stop me, if you'd like. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR, WAXMAN Q But on the second page you’ve indicated "I'm alerting you because Michael Waxman’s going after my four year old daughter." and that’s why you've put this information in print for these people, correct? A Correct. ‘They have been admitted into evidence, the emails ‘that you have written, where you say--and you also said under oath--that you're nurturing a bond with my four year old daughter. COURT: I think the record is very clear that Dr. Handrahan has been very vocal and very upset about the way things have gone in the past in this case. She has been vocal about her opinions about Mr. Waxman and about others in the case. I understand all of that. Let’s move on. MR. WAXMAN: Okay. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q Looking at the next exhibit, 59, will you identify what that is for the Court? Is that another email authored by 18won 10 aa 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you? A It is another email authored by me, to Mickey at the Governor LePage's Office, Q Okay. 1 just want to know what it is, ma‘am, That’s so I can A It’s an email authored by me. Q Thank you. MR. WAXMAN: I'd like to move the admission of Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 59. MS. HOFFMAN: Again, I'd like a moment to review. COURT: Okay. (Pause) MS. HOFFMAN: I would again object. I just do not see the xelevance to the relocation. COURT: Okay. How is this particular-- MR, WAXMAN: This one, which-- COURT: --exhibit relevant? MR, WAXMAN: --discusses this court, this judge, by name and there's another one that does that as well, seems to imply that there is a conspiracy to deprive her of her relationship with her child. COURT: The objection’s sustained. I understand Dr. Handrahan is upset with rulings I’ve made. 1 understand that. Unfortunately, that’s the way things have gone. I have to make the best call I can, based upon the evidence I get. I 1910 a 12 13 14 45 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 understand Dr. Handrahan has been upset. That’s not unusual. Lots of folks are upset with the Court's decisions in lots of cases, and I understand that Dr. Handrahan has been particularly vocal in a lot of different places about what's happened. That doesn’t change--that’s really not relevant as to how I have to determine what happens in the future here. MR. WAXMAN: With all due respect-- CouRT: So the objection is sustained. MR. WAXMAN: With all due-- COURT: I understand that Dr. Handrahan doesn’ t--doesn’t feel that I’ve made good decisions, Let’s move on. MR. WAXMAN: Your Honor, with all due respect, I must say this for the record. This litigant’s state of mind, since she is the mother of a four year old daughter, is at the center of this case. COURT: Okay. Mr. Waxman, I understand that. I also understand, and it’s abundantly clear, that Dr. Handrahan has been very vocal and feels that she has not been done justice. And she’s been very vocal about that to a lot of different places. Let's move onto something else, please DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q Do you believe that there is a conspiracy that I've involved in to deprive you of your child? A I don’t know. Q. Do you believe that I’ve been involved in judicial 2010 a 12 13 1d 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 misconduct, trying to deprive you of your child? COURT: I’m sorry, the question was? MR, WAXMAN: Do you believe I’ve been involved in judicial misconduct to try to deprive you of your child. COURT: Judicial misconduct? MR. WAXMAN; Yes. COURT: Well, unless you're @ judge, I don’t know how that can be. MR. WAXMAN: All right. Let me rephrase the question. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN @ Do you believe I’ve been involved in misconduct involving improperly influencing judges in this case? A I don’t know. Q Well did you say that in an email to the head of the Maine State Bar Association, and the incoming head? A I/11 have to see the email to be precise. Q All right, I’m showing you now what’s been marked for identification as Exhibit 61. Can you tell us what that is? It’s more of the same. It’s a summary of-- Is it an email? Tt is an email that I wrote, yes. op oO Dp ALL right. MR. WAXMAN: I‘ like to move the admission of Exhibit 61. COURT: Ms. Hoffman? 2110 at 12 23 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 a3 24 25 MS. HOFFMAN: Again, I have not reviewed this, Your Honor. (Pause) I hate to be a broken record but, again, T am just not seeing the relevance of this particular email, I believe it’s already been ruled on, that the anger in this case is not admissible. MR, WAXMAN: Your Honor, this one in particular is extremely relevant because it also includes passages in here, discussing Mr. Malenko and how she believes he’s giving the child methamphetamine, and she’s drug testing her child with a urinalysis to secure evidence of that. COURT: Is that true, Ms. Hoffman? Is there reference to that in the email? MS. HOFFMAN: There is. COURT: It’s admitted. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q All right. I’m going to ask you a few questions about each paragraph. The first paragraph you indicate--let’s just ask--that your daughter has just spent ten days at my house and told you horror stories of what happened there. What’s the basis for that assertion? A Mila--it‘s about a month ago. I’m not exact on the dates. It was the time in which Igor Malenko was driving Mr, Waxman’s car for about three or four weeks. And Mila came home and said “Mommy, Mommy, we were driving Michael’s car," which is a sports convertible. $0 she 2210 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 igs 19 20 a1 22 23 24 25 was very excited, because she likes Curious George, and Curious George--the man with the yellow hat drives a convertible. So she really wants a convertible. So she was very excited that they were driving Michael's car, which is a fancy convertible. and then she said ‘we stayed at Michael’s house.” She said “I really missed my dog and my cat, because we didn’t stay at home.” And then she said, with tears coming down her face, with no sounds, just tears streaming down her face, she said “Michael says that my mommy doesn’t love me," and this is why he’s going to have to take her from me. and then she just kept saying "why does Michael say my mommy doesn’t love me? Why does Michael say my mommy doesn’t love me?" And that was the point, which the next day I did actually drive to Governor Lepage elect's office with the--and.T met with Mickey Mullen. and I said ‘why is this being allowed to happen to my child? why is this lawyer being allowed to tell my daughter that her mother doesn’t love her, and that’s why he’s going to take her from me?" and this is only one of a few. She's repeatedly told me “Michael says you‘re a bad mommy. Michael says you're not a real mommy.” This is a repeat thing. So I said to her--I just asked non-leading questions, as I’ve been told to do. I said “Well, what did you stay in?" and she said “Well, he has bunk beds,” which she has said before, 23© eo am 10 a 12 13 4 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 »p Oo RO » Oo PO and that’s been put in record before. She said--I said “does he have children at his house?" She said “Yes. He has three children, but one doesn’t live there.” She gave me very accurate detail. so-- Let me stop you there. She gave you very accurate details, you said? How would you know whether they’re accurate? Well, I know that you have three kids, and one doesn’t live with you. I know that last time-— How do you-- ~-she-- Oh, stop. How do you know that I have three kids? Mr. Waxman, this has all been brought out in the protection order that I brought against you, where you actually testified on record, and maybe the Court could proffer these transcripts, -~ Okay. So it's-~ --where you said you'd make a better parent than I would. Okay. Ma'am, ma’am,-- Where you said you do stand by everything you said, that you vow to take my child from me. It’s all on court record. Let me-- So I don’t see how this goes to my-~ COURT: Okay. So the-~ 24os 7 18 19 20 a1 22 23 24 25 WITNESS: --state of mind. COURT: --answer is that it’s in a transcript somewhere, -- MR. WAXMAN: Okay. COURT: --Mr. Waxman. MR. WAXMAN: All right. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Do you remember, around the same time, that Igor’s car broke down in the Camden area? It did, yes. and so, in the ensuing weeks, you saw him drive two different cars, didn’t you? You saw a Saab Convertible, and you saw a silver Subaru Outback, right? I don’t know how you would know what I saw. I only saw the Saab Convertible. I did not see-- Okay. --an Outback, but I’m curious to know how you would know what I saw, Mr. Waxman. Well, if I suggested to you that the reason you saw your daughter in a convertible was because I lent Tgor one of my two cars for a period of time, do you have any evidence to contradict that? Well, this goes to my daughter telling me the truth. She said “We're driving Michael’s car," and I had see Igor pick Mila up in a convertible, and Mila was telling me that it was a convertible. So, yes, it goes to my 2510 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a1 22 23 24 25 o> Oo Pp daughter giving me accurate details about what's happening in her life,-~ But if I suggest to you-- --when she’s-~ --that I have--unless I have miscount [sic]--four children, not three, do you have any evidence to-- Mr. Waxman, I believe-- --dispute that? --the record will show you have three living with you, and one who does not-- Okay. ive with you. and if the evidence--if I suggest to you that I do not have a bunk bed in my house, do you have any evidence to dispute that? I do not. Okay. I have no access to your home. All right. Where--you say here that, in all the court transcripts, I vowed that I would stop at nothing to take your daughter from you, 1 have all the transcripts right here. I have the--the--all five volumes of the divorce. I have a transcript from the disqualification hearing. 1 have a transcript from the PFA hearing, which-- (Indiscernible)--did not attend, and I have a two-volume 2610 qn 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transcript of a PFH hearing, which again-- (Indiscernible)--did not attend. Would you please t-- I'11--1'll grab whichever one you want. Where did I say that under oath? A We've been over this, actually, in the transcript for the PFH hearing. You said you vowed you would stop at nothing, and then the sentence stopped, and that transcript was in the disqualification hearing with Judge Moskowitz originally. You did not then say to take my daughter, but it has been implied many times in many different ways by you, Mr. Waxman, in many emails that you have written to my lawyers, all of which were admitted to evidence to the Court. My bottom line is, why should my child--why should this relationship between you and my child be happening? And I don’t really see how any of that is actually relevant to today’s hearing. We've been over this, many different forums now, and I don't see how this goes to my mental state of mind, since these are all accurate details that, mainly, you've put in record yourself. I think any mother would be upset if a lawyer of the father, -- COURT: Dr. Handrahan,-- WITNESS: --who is trying to get sole custody, ~~ COURT: --I think you've answered the question. Mr. Waxman? 27au aun 10 a 12 B 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN I just want to see if I can refresh your recollection here. In the disqualification hearing, which by the way you attended that, correct? I did, yes. All right. There was a colloquy between me on the witness stand, and Ken Altschuler, in which he asked whether I would stop at nothing. Is that what you're referring to? I don’t have the exact transcript. That‘s what I'm referring to, I don’t have it in front of me, so-- Okay. MR. WAXMAN: Well, may I approach the witness, Your Honor? COURT: Yes. MR. WAXMAN: You see here on page-- COURT: We need to move on, Mr. Waxman. So I'll let you develop this, but go ahead. MR. WAXMAN: All right. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN On page one twenty-nine, let me just read this, an@ you tell me if I read it accurately. At line thirteen, cross examination by Mr, Altschuler, Question: “Mr. Waxman, there is nothing you won’t do. No boundaries to this case that you won't do, until justice is done and mr. Waxman [sic]--is there?” Answer: ‘No. I want justice 2810 a. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1g 20 a1 22 23 24 25 done. I certainly won't do anything that’s unethical or illegal, but I will--" Question: “Do you know any other boundaries? will you talk to anybody? Will you threaten anybody? Would you intimidate anyone until you--you see justice served?" Answer: “That's a dumb question. I/11 do what--" Question: “The answer is no?” Answer: “What is--" Question: "Mr. Waxman,--" Answer: “No. The answer isn’t--I won't do anything. 1'11 do what. MS. HOFFMAN: Objection, badgering the witness. MR, WAXMAN: *--T think is appropriate under the circumstances.” COURT: Actually, he’s not badgering the witness. He's actually--he's just, unfortunately, reading from a transcript that very accurately shows how vitriolic this whole case has been forever. And I remember that hearing. I presided over it. I remember the cross examination by Mr. Altschuler of Mr. Waxman, It was heated. It was essentially out of control. I remember it very well. Let's move on, sir. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR, WAXMAN Q Let's move on, In the second paragraph of Exhibit 61 it indicates, apparently, that you've been trying to get Mr. Malenko deported, is that correct? A I have not been trying to get him deported. They contacted me because they had started an investigation. I did not make initial contact. I think we responded 2910 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 24 22 23 24 25 when a federal officer had called me. Q Well you say here "Yet I.C.E. won't deport him. First they told me two weeks ago--two weeks to deport him and he was gone. Then they tell me not viable. Senator Collins and Congressman Michaud have been calling. Nothing seems to help.” A Yes. You're trying to get him deported, right? A When the I.C.E. people contacted me in their investigation, that’s what they told me. And then this is exactly what happened. So, yes. Q You'd like him deported, would you not? A I would like to actually live a normal life, Mr. w. . where the most important thing-- court : Dr. Handrahan, the question was would you like Mr. Malenko deported. WITNESS: T would not like him deported, no. COURT: Okay. WITNESS: I wouldn't. 1 would like-- COURT: Next question, please. MR. WAXMAN: Okay. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q ‘Next paragraph, you indicated that your child has come home with 56 ng of meth, m-e-t-h. That means methamphetamine, correct? 3010 ut 12 13 id 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 o » Oo p o>» Oy Oo vy Oo BO Correct. In her urine, saying her father blew meth in her face that was like wind and made her cough. Correct. You wrote that, right? Correct. DEA said “Oh my God, we are going to do something. A lab result of 56 ng of meth in a three year old,” you wrote that, right? Correct, I did. Did you mean mg, milligrams? No, nanograms. I see. I need to understand here, you did a urinalysis on your daughter after she came back from a visit with her father? Well, Mr. Malenko took Mila shoplifting, and he shoplifted the children’s cough syrup when she was not sick, She hadn’t had a cold. I breast fed for fifteen months. So she has an incredibly good immune system. She rarely gets colds. She didn’t even have a sniffle. But I’m asking about-- So I --this urinalysis you conducted. Yeah, and I-- When did you do that? 31eo 3% 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 aw 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A I’m trying--I'm trying to answer the question. Q Well I want you to answer my question. When did you do that? COURT: Just for the record, I’ve disregarded the first part of that answer. It's really not admissible. So if you could answer the specific question, Dr. Handrahan, I'd appreciate it. Please answer the specific question. Mr. Waxman, what is the specific question? MR. WAXMAN: When did you give your daughter a urinalysis? cour’ : Okay. Answer, please? WITNESS: I don’t know the exact date, because I don’t have my records in front of me. COURT: Okay. WITNESS: We did it right after the shoplifting, | COURT: She doesn’t know the exact date-— MR. WAXMAN: Okay. CouRT: --but after the incident that Mr. Malenko was charged for. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Would that have been in February or so of 2010? Tf that’s when he was-- All right, sure. --charged with shoplifting. er) Okay. So describe for us what you did with your 3210 a 12 23 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a1 22 23 24 25 ° » oO Pp Oop daughter? I called a sexual assault forensicer [sic], and I said “why would he have done cough syrup? I don’t understand," and-- I’m sorry. I didn’t hear you. You called a what? A sexual assault forensic examiner, I said. Well, let me stop you there. You--you understood he'd shoplifted with your daughter, and then you called a sexual assault forensic examiner? what--I don’t understand the connection. She wasn’t sick. He shoplifted cough syrup. Pedophiles tend to use cough syrup when they sedate children. on. She suggested we do a date rape panel immediately upon a pick up, which we did, and Mila came back with fifty-six nanograms with methamphetamine-~ Okay. --in her urine. Let me stop you there. You did a date rape panel on your daughter? It's a urinalysis test, yes. was her vagina probed as well? It was a urinalysis and that’s all. Okay. who conducted this test? The National Medical Labs. They're one of the best in 3310 11 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 en) the country. Where are they? In Pennsylvania. You brought her to Pennsylvania? Tt was a urinalysis, Mr. Waxman. We mailed the urine to the lab. All right. So did you get the--did you catch the urine of your daughter? I did but I had the nurse there to keep a chain of custody. who? Paula Campbell. Oh, Paula Campbell. what did you tell your daughter was the reason for catching her urine? I said we just wanted to make sure that she was eating enough fruits and vegetables. We talked about how important it is to have five alive every day. Five fruits, five vegetables. when she has well-child visits, sometimes she has urine samples, so it’s not a big deal. I see. And then you got some kind of a result back at some point that said there was 56 ng of methamphetamine in her urine? Yes, I did. Did you, at some point, learn that decongestants can create false positives? 34~ Rw we a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 DP Oo Dp They can, but the decongestant that was shoplifted was not--it was a naturopath solution. So we investigated that, and then I did sent an email asking if he has used a Vick's Vapor Inhaler, because a Vick’s Vapor Inhaler might create false positives, and he wrote back absolutely not. You should never use one of these. They are very dangerous for children. I never used one. Did he ever tell you that he does use Vick’s Vapor Rub but not the--but not the--but not the method you just mentioned? As I said, we have an email back from Mr. Malenko, saying he never used these. Okay. Have you ever seen Vick’s Vapor ‘Rub in these containers? Yes, I have. Are you aware that Mr. Malenko uses this? I’m not because when I asked, he told me no. Doesn't your daughter sometimes come home from visits smelling like Vick’s Vapor Rub? No. She only comes home smelling like chlorine, because he takes her to the swimming pool, which I'm very glad. She's an excellent swimmer. So you believe, do you not, that Mr. Malenko gave your daughter methamphetamines? All I know are the facts, Mr. Waxman, and that she came 35au se wn 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 oy» oO > OD home froma visit with this level in her urine, documented by a national lab. Your daughter, you would agree, is an exceptional four year old child, right? She is. You just got her accepted into one of the best Montessori schools in Washington, D.C., right? I did. She tests at a five or six age level, right? Six. and she’s a very happy child, isn’t she? She tends to be, yes. And you‘ve had no comments from any of your daycare providers, provoking any concern for you about her behavior, that would seem to indicate a drug related issue, right? Right. But, nonetheless, you believe Mr. Malenko is giving your daughter methamphetamine, right? All I know, is that she came home from a visit, and this was the lab results we got. And you called the DEA, correct? I certainly did, because child protection would do nothing when we submitted these results. Okay. It’s true, is it not, that if you had--if you 36woe aw ew a 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 could ask the judge to deliver whatever conclusion you'd like, you'd like Mr. Malenko to have no contact-- MS. HOFFMAN: Objection, leading. MR. WAXMAN: --of any kind--it is leading. COURT: Well, if Mr. Waxman can lead, I’m going to let him ead Dr. Handrahan, because she’s obviously a witness from the opposite side, and there’s hostility. Mr. Waxman? DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q You'd like the judge to order that Igor have absolutely no contact with your daughter, correct? A No. In fact, we had proposed, if the relocation is allowed, I will make--bend over backwards to ensure the contact. I will fly home every other Thursday with Mila. Igor can have her for summers and holidays. Q Dia-- A I have driven five hundred miles every week to maintain this schedule, from Thursday to Sunday, that Judge Moskowitz imposed over a year ago. I’ve almost never missed a visit. I've worked incredibly hard to do what the Court would like me to do. I’ve worked incredibly hard to prove to the Court that I am not who Mr. Waxman makes me out to be, in this smear campaign that’s gone on, And I will continue to maintain the visitation schedule. I would like this battle to end. Q Okay. 3710 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I would like to live. Okay. --a normal life with my child, -- All right. ~-and I'd like my child to be safe. oP Oo Pp Oo Dp What--can I ask you how does removing Judge Moskowitz from the bench have any relevance whatsoever to your relationship with your child? COURT: Okay. Let’s move on, Mr. Waxman. I understand Dr. Handrahan is not happy with previous rulings I’ve made and others have made in the cases related to this. Let’s move on to something else. MR. WAXMAN: Well, I need to make a record, Your Honor. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q I’m showing you what I’ve marked as Exhibit 60. What is that? A Te’s an email written by me. Q All right. MR. WAXMAN: I’m going to make an offer of proof, Your Honor. Exhibit 60 is an email that this Defendant wrote to a member of Governor LePage’s team, asking and demanding that you be taken off of the bench immediately. She has done research on cases that you have been involved in, and that she hasn't liked the results of, involving child abusers. And she is indicating that she wants Governor LePage to remove you 3810 qn 12 13 14 45 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 from office. COURT: Okay. MR. WAXMAN: I’m admitting--I'm proffering this to show her state of mind, and also to show that this is a litigant who is making an effort to force a recusal, which can't be done at this late a juncture, in any event. But I would--r like this--I would move this for admission. COURT: Okay. Ms. Hoffman? MS. HOFFMAN: Although I haven‘t had time to review this, I would object to its admission because, again, it’s just part of the campaign to--I mean it sounds like Mr. Waxman is trying to force a recusal. This is just not relevant-- couRT: It isn’t relevant, -- MS. HOFFMAN: --to this matter, COURT: --and it’s been--will not be admitted. MR. WAXMAN: Okay. courT: and let’s move on, please. MR. WAXMAN: All right, move on. I’m showing you now what I’ve marked for identification as Defendant’s [sic] Exhibit 51. COURT: Defendant's Exhibit 51? MR. WAXMAN: I’m sorry. Plaintiff's Exhibit 51. COURT: Thank you. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR, WAXMAN Q Is that an email that you authored as well? 3910 aL 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A It is. Q = That’s to Igor on January 11th, correct? A Correct. Q and this is to inform him--the subject line--Mila has been accepted at Aidan Montessori, right? A Right Q Okay. And you indicate on the first line “Igor, please tell. ‘MR. WAXMAN: I’m sorry. I move the admission of this document. COURT: Um, -- MS. HOFFMAN: No objection. COURT: --what, I'm sorry? No objection? MS. HOFFMAN: No. COURT: Okay. It's admitted. MR. WAXMAN: If the Court would like, I have an extra copy. he Court can hold onto this while z-- COURT: Okay, thank you. That's written the 1ith of this month? MR. WAXMAN: Correct. COURT: Okay, thank you. MR. WAXMAN: Okay. I'l] get mine. (Pause) DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q Okay. “I’m pleased to tell you that Mila has just been accepted into Aidan Montessori," and you provide a link 40a YU & wn 10 1. 12 2B 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22, 22 23 24 25 to Aidan Montessori, correct? Correct. You indicate that Aidan is the oldest Montessori school and one of the best in the country, correct? Correct. You indicate that she’s--that is Mila--had an amazing interview, and the school was delighted to invited her to join the community, and that she tested well above four years, up into the five/six year standard knowledge, correct? Correct. Did you, at any time before you brought Mila down to Washington, D.c., notify Igor that you were doing that? In fact, I did, and there’s an email that was admitted to the Court when I first gave'my thirty days’ notice. and I said I'd really welcome discussion. 1I/d like to continue her Montessori education. The only response back from Igor was wanting to know where I was working, my place of employment, and exactly what day I was relocating. There was no discussion from him at all to talk about where. If he had contacted me, I certainly would have invited him for the interview. He was not interested. All right. He didn’t reply-~ 4110 a 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 > oD» oD 49. That's fine --to any of my questions. I said-- Are you referring- --I'd like him to help with her-- COURT: Okay. So the answer is she did. Are you referring to Exhibit 49, Plaintiff’s Exhibit 49? Yes, that’s correct Okay. Can you point out where it is you indicated in that email that you were going to- MR. WAXMAN: By the way, I move the admission of Exhibit It’s an authored email from you, correct? WITNESS: It is. COURT: Any objection? MS. HOFFMAN: No. COURT: It’s admitted. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN You put where in there you indicate you‘re going to bring her down there, have her interviewed and have her go through tests? where in there? I know you support Mila’s Montessori education. I have explored options for her continued educational development. I’m delighted to let you know she’s been accepted in a school that offers French and Spanish. 1/4 like to discuss specifics with you at your earliest convenience. She's able to enroll immediately upon our 4210 a 12 23 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Oo» Oo PO arrival in D.c, I will, as I have, continue to send you all reports and newsletters that I receive from the school. I hope that you understand this move is absolutely necessary to make a living. I’ve been trying since 2001 to work from Maine." Okay, okay. “It’s not realistic." I don’t need you to keep reading that. where, in here, do you tell Igor that you'd like to bring her down to Washington, D.C., on a plane, have her meet a bunch of kids at a new Montessori school, have her tested and have hex interviewed? Where, in that document, is that? Well, I think it’s quite clear. ‘I‘d like to discuss specifics at your earliest convenience." Okay. In fact, you had never told him “Igor, I'd like to take her to Washington. I’d like to have her interviewed.” You never told him that, did you? Mr. Waxman, when somebody enrolls in a school, it’s implied that they need to be interviewed. and in Montessori education there’s always an-- Dr. Handrahan, please-- ~-hour-- --(Indiscernible)--my question. Where-- It's implied here, -- Okay. 43 | |10 4a 12 2B 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 --Mr. Waxman. Did you not have any thought that taking your daughter to a new place, getting her excited, having her meet teachers and make friends, might set up some expectations for her about going to that school? Well, I was hoping and assuming that the Court would not object to the relocation- Well, but why-- -with Mila, would not switch primary residence. I was not anticipating that there would be barring from her for [sic] leaving the state. and one relocates, as a professional and a single mom with a child, you don’t just show up in a city on day thirty. You have to do preparations ahead of time. I understand that, but you understand too, do you not, that as a result of a divorce judgment, you and Igor have shared rights and responsibilities, right? Which is why I sent this letter, Mr. Waxman, and there was no response from Igor. There was nothing back to me. Okay. What does shared rights and responsibilities mean to you in this case? What are you obligations under that? Well that means--I’ve absolutely worked incredibly hard to do since Judge Moskowitz issued this judgement over two years ago. I have-- 4410 aa 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 au 22 23 24. 25 oy 0» OD OD my 0 Specifics, please. What, exactly, does it mean to you? All of these emails are on record. I forward information about Mila’s progress at school. I have asked Mr. Malenko continuously to enroll her in extracurricular activities on the weekends, because she is not with me every weekend with-- Can I stop you, Doctor? --extracurriculars on the weekend. Can I please stop you? Do you agree that shared rights and responsibilities means, in essence, that with any decision that has a significant impact on your daughter’s well-being, the two parents are supposed to discuss that and then try to reach mutual agreements? That's exactly why we've asked, over and over, for mediation instead of court, because I don’t think that order after order after order-- Okay. ~-after order actually is conducive to-- Okay. --shared-- Who-- --parental rights in cooperation. All right. We've asked for mediation over and over. ‘That's fine. 4510 1. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COURT: Okay. You've answered the question, Doctor. Next question? MR, WAXMAN: All right. I’m almost done, Your Honor, with this examination. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR, WAXMAN Q On this document--1/11 go back to 51--you indicate in the third paragraph “I realize that you and Waxman are working hard with Judge Moskowitz to destroy Mila’s future and keep her trapped in Maine.” You were in Maine until you were eighteen, right? am I right? A Iwas. Okay. And you've gone to one of the finest institutions of learning in the country [sic] and gotten a PhD, and then-- A Mr. Waxman, -- In the world rather, right? A --you grew up with enormous wealth, as you like to tell everybody. COURT: Dr. Handrahan, once again I’m going to ask you to please confine your answer to the question. WITNESS: Yes. COURT: The question again, Mr. Waxman? MR. WAXMAN: And you are-- COURT: What was the question again. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN 46ox 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2. 22 23 24 25 Oo» Oo py You were raised in Maine until you were eighteen, and yet you went onto a very good institution of learning and got a doctorate, right? Yes. Is that right? I said yes. Okay. By the way, you mention here in the third full paragraph you were in New York City, a city that Mila loves. How--what does that mean? I mean, how many major cities has Mila been to? Mila’s traveled to Washington and New York with me often. She loves--absolutely loves New York, and I'm glad you gave me the opportunity to tell this story. No. I don’t want to respond. I asked you a very simple question. COURT: Okay, the question’s been answered. Next question? All right. Don’t you think that Mila would enjoy any city that she’s in with someone she loves? I think that Mila enjoys being in cities, absolutely. No, no. My question is, don’t you think Mila would enjoy any city, any place in the world, as long as she’s with someone she loves? I think that there--she enjoys cities, and she enjoys being with people that she loves, absolutely. All right. a710 4b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 > Oo » Oo Dm I'm not quite sure how they connect but-- You indicate here “You are destroying your daughter's future." What do you mean by that? Well, Mr. Waxman, we wrote a very nice email, asking for Igor to communicate, to talk about this relocation, begging--you know--not to have more motions with the court. And the first thing that--I don’t know how many motions you filed. I stopped reading them--two or three demanding she be barred from leaving the state. I was told by my lawyer that-- MR. WAXMAN: Objection, WITNESS: --this may have been-- MR. WAXMAN: --nonresponsive. COURT: Okay. It is nonresponsive. Next question? MR. WAXMAN: What do you mean-~ COURT: Let's move onto something else. MR. WAXMAN: I have no further--well, actually, I do. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN At some point in time, while the DHHS investigation was ongoing, you produced for DHHS a videotape, did you not? It was given to Larry Ricci. And it was also given to Beth Fossett, was it not? I’m not quite clear. Okay. I know that Larry Ricci got a copy; I’m not sure how, 4810 aw 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q This was about a minute and a half videotape of your daughter saying sexual things with regard to her father, correct? A It was. And you produced that yourself, correct? A T did. MR. WAXMAN: That is what is in Exhibit 57, Your Honor. I'd like to move the admission of 57. Defendant has a copy of this. I mean I--she can view it at a break, perhaps. I don’t know. COURT: Ms. Hoffman? MS, HOFFMAN: I haven't seen it. COURT: Okay. Well, how long? A minute and a half? MR. WAXMAN: A minute and a half. COURT: Let's take a very--let’s take a three-minute recess. We‘ll allow--is there a computer here that Ms. Hoffman can view that on? MR. WAXMAN: Igor has one. COURT: We‘ll let Ms. Hoffman look at the exhibit, and then we/ll come back. MR. WAXMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. MACHINE OFF - MACHINE ON COURT: ...57. MS. HOFFMAN: I have. I would object to its relevance. It’s already two years old. It’s already been ruled on by the 4910 i 12 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 Court. COURT: Right. How is it relevant, Mr. Waxman? MR. WAXMAN: It shows the lengths that this litigant will go to with her child, to teach her to have her parrot and record sexualized content. COURT: Okay. The--I don’t know whether that’s necessarily relevant. I've had--I was the judge that listened to the evidence in that protection from abuse matter. There were complex evidentiary issues in that matter, in the first instance, because the evidence consisted of, essentially, hearsay information from a witness who was not competent at the time. That witness namely being, because of her age. I think that was agreed upon by everyone. The evidence, as I recall it, established that the information that Mila provided seemed to be coached, Thats the impression I distinctly got from the evidence that was submitted at that hearing, and I denied the request for the final order, based upon the evidence presented. I don’t know that that’s going to add anything to my recollection of the evidence in that case. It’s really not--it’s very tangentially relevant to this matter. I understand why Mr. Waxman’s offering it, but I recall the evidence fairly clearly from that hearing. I remember it as being evidence that Mila was--her statements seemed, to the Court, to be coached. And I don’t know whether it's necessary to admit 57. Ms. Hoffman, do you have any 5010 1 12 13 4 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 further comment, based upon my recollection of the evidence in the previous hearing? Because, of course, we/re not here to determine whether there’s been any sexual assault. we're just--that’s already been decided. MS. HOFFMAN: Again, this is a relocation hearing. So I-- COURT: So, Mr. Waxman, again, why do you proffer 57? MR, WAXMAN: I think it shows, again, unfortunately, the lengths to which this litigant will ignore the best interests of her child and direct her, coach her, force her to say horrendous things about her father, with no understanding of the impact that would have on the relationship with the father. COURT: Okay. It’ll be admitted for that purpose. DIRECT EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. WAXMAN Q The last question, Dr. Handrahan, did you recently say to Mila “We're going to get rid of Daddy. We're going to move to another country”? A I did not ‘ Q You did not? MR. WAXMAN: That's all I have. Your Honor, may I ask you an administrative question at this juncture? COURT: sure MR. WAXMAN: I’ve taken up, I think, almost an hour--no, not quite--of my time. I think the fairer way to do this would be to give us each an hour and a half and then credit: 5110 4a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 for instance through cross examination Dr. Handrahan could use off the remainder of my time, which would be unfair, because she could determine or decide to just continue to go on and give long answers. So I think that the cross examination should be credited to the person doing the cross examining. COURT: That's what I intend. MR. WAXMAN: Okay. courT: I intend for each side to have an hour and a half worth of-- MR. WAXMAN: Oh, I see, Thank you, Your Hohor. COURT: You're welcome (Pause) CROSS EXAMINATION BY MS. HOFFMAN So, Lori, how old is Mila? She just turned four. and where do you live? I reside in Sorrento, as you know. How far away is Sorrento from Portland? It takes about four hours. one way? one way. What's the current contact schedule? > Oo PO FP Oy 0 RP It’s every other Thursday from four thirty until four on Sunday, and every other Friday from four. thirty until four on Sunday. 52oo 10 a. 12 3 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 24 22 23 24 25 er) That's Mila’s contact with Igor? Yes. So it's every weekend, but every other week there’s an extra Friday. What's the current agreement with regards to transportation? nd not I do the vast majority. 1 do--it's about-, exactly. So I don’t want to be accused, if I'ma few miles off. It’s about a five hundred mile drive for me, round trip, and I believe it’s about a sixty mile drive for Mr. Malenko. Mr, Malenko drives from South Portland to Brunswick, and I drive from Sorrento to Brunswick. The trip from Sorrento to Brunswick always takes me about three hours, unless there’s snow or ice or rain. and then it takes me a little bit longer. I’m also driving at night, so I tend to go more slowly. So I drive every Thursday or Friday I drive eight hours, and every Sunday I dive eight hours as I have done, for well over a year now, to maintain this schedule. Have you ever had to miss a visit-- in the past year and a half? I have. There’s only been a few occasions. I had actually counted up the number of visits. At some point it was almost, you know, three hundred visits including the very beginning, when Mr. Malenko had every other day. 53toa neon 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 There were a very few times--once Mila had a fever. once she cut off the tip of her thumb at school with the scissors. Once I was sick, but he was always given minute-for-minute makeup time, So there was always a very valid reason, for which I said ‘I really can’t do the visit this weekend, and can you accept this?” What’s a typical day like for Mila in your home? Well when we--when we get back, we get back very late on Sunday. We don’t get back until about eight. So we're both quite tired on Mondays. So she doesn’t go to school on Mondays, because that was--we did that at the beginning. It was too difficult for her. So Mondays is a Mila and Mommy day, because I have no weekend time with her. I have no free time with her. All of my time is weekday time, So I’m balancing work and Mila, So I basically completely turned my normal schedule upside down. TI do lots more work at night, after she’s gone to sleep, or on the weekends. Saturday and Sunday, when I’m not driving, are workdays for me. I sit at my desk and work eight hours. So Monday is like having a Sunday with her, and it’s our day together, and we get up. We make breakfast together. She loves to cook. We cook together. We do a lot of outdoor activities. Sorrento’s a very beautiful place, right on the ocean. We take long walks through the woods. We love to collect sea glass. 5410 wa 12 2B 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 a 22 23 24 25 We have a lot of play dates with her friends in the community. Often, her friends will come down and we'll take a long walk. We may have a play date into the afternoon and make dinner for them. We play in the backyard. We ride bikes. We go to the playground. I cook all the food organically. As I said, she helps. we have a rhythm to the day. She sometimes--she’s phasing out of naps. Sometimes she needs a nap. Sometimes she doesn’t, And then in the evening we have a very solid and consistent--very important bedtime routine we typically do. She loves to do her workbook, and we've been doing that ever since we were in Sorrento--I've been in Sorrento. And reading, we spend two hours. what are her workbooks? Well, every evening for about two hours we get--we do the bath. We do ‘jamas, we brush teeth, and we get into bed to read books. So she--you know--first she loves Winnie the Pooh. We've read every single Winnie the Pooh story imaginable. She likes~-she reads them until she can memorize them. Now we're into Dr. Seuss. So we read Dr. Seuss or Harold the Purple Crayon. And she goes in phases but we do--she loves to do workbooks. So I have workbooks for kindergarten, first grade. We do spelling, reading, math and she just loves them, and sometimes so much I'll say “I’m too tired to do fractions right now. 5510 4. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Can we just--can I read you Dr. Seuss?” She's like ‘I want to do another page on fractions.” So, you know, we've consistently done that and she--the teachers all tell me they can’t believe that she’s four because she's so--she’s so eager for knowledge. She’s just--it's wonderful to see her. So where is she in school? She‘s at a Montessori in Ellsworth and she’s also--two days out of every month she goes to a Montessori in South Portland. And she’s thrived at this Montessori in Ellsworth. It’s been a wonderful environment for her, and then she’s three--so she’s only in the Montessori in Ellsworth three half days a week because, again, I/d have no time with her. And she needs time with her mother, and that’s been a very important part of making sure that she stays well and healthy during this period. So then ‘Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday she does a half day, which is eight thirty to--anywhere between eight, and nine we do the drop off. I've stayed in the tennis center, where her school is part of this tennis center. And I do work just above, so I’m just near her, and so I have three half days a week to do work, and then in the afternoon we do nap. We do--we bake. We cook. We go outside. we walk. We play. We have play dates. We go through our normal routine. Wwe do projects, and then we go into 56aoa uw 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 as » Oo PO workbooks and reading, and then we're driving down for the drive for the weekend. At the time of your divorce, were you working? Twas, yes. What’s your employment field? I do international development work. So I work--I used to work overseas. Obviously, now I won't be able to do that for a long time, but most of my work's either in New York or D.C., because it’s international development. It’s like being a foreign service officer, except you work for non-governmental organizations. Can you-- It’s humanitarian response, and I was senior gender advisor [phonetic] for CARE, which was American’s largest humanitarian organization at the time. And when did you lose your employment? I lost my employment in July because I really needed to be in Washington, D.C. and I was--I was not allowed to do s0, and I chose to be with my child, rather than keep a job, because there’s nothing more important than my daughter. And I was--I was devastated to lose that salary and that income, and that’s spun me into foreclosure on and off for the past two years and quite difficult financial times. But I knew that I could freelance because I’ve freelanced for a long time. A lot 3710 ci 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 ag 20 24 22 23 24 25 > Oo po of my colleagues made sure that I was still involved and was able to maintain some small income. So what have you done for employment since losing that position at CARE? I did a large review for the--it’s called OCHA. It’s the UN Agency for Humanitarian Coordination. It’s the Office of Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs. So whenever there's a large-scale disaster like Haiti happened, when the earthquake in Haiti happened, this UN office goes and coordinates the emergency response. Okay. So my first contract after I lost the job with CARE was to do a large-scale research project for them, and 1 could do it from Sorrento. $0 have you only been able to do contract work-- Yes. --in your field from Maine? I’ve only been able to do--there’s no--there’s no employees that--there’s very little employment in Maine for anybody, I mean, there’s no employment in my field at all in Maine, but everybody knows what the economy is like. It’s one of the worst economies that weve ever had. In--the economy of Maine is particularly bad. 1 did apply for a position at the College of the Atlantic because nothing--you know--my daughter's the most 58aoe 10 i 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 important, but they ended up not fulfilling those--that hiring position, which is happening around the state to a lot of people. So what have you done, in terms of search for employment, since losing that position with CARE? Well, I constantly apply for short-term desk research contracts that I could do from Maine, but it’s always hard because you never know when you're going to get another job. You never know when you're going to get paid. The UN tends to pay eight to nine or ten months afterwards. and I’ve applied for a few positions in D.C., but very selectively, and a few in New York, but 1’@ rather be in Washington because it’s a very livable child-friendly city, and this position came up. So what is--what is the position? It's one of President Obama’s special initiatives that he started. It’s a girls’ scholarship program in Africa. So it’s the last year of a forty-three million dollar U. S. Government grant to make sure that girls graduate from secondary schools in Africa. Because if you get through secondary education, you basically have a very good chance of being out of poverty and living a good life. and so it’s a very important indicator of success. I would like to admit--1'd like to show you Defendant‘s Exhibit 1. Is this a letter-- 5910 ce 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A that’s my new hire letter, yes. MS. HOFFMAN: I'd offer that into evidence. MR. WAXMAN: I have no objection. I’ve never seen it before, but I have no objection. COURT: Okay. It’s admitted. Do you want to see it first, Me. Waxman? MR. WAXMAN: I’ve seen it now. It’s fine-- (Indiscernible) . COURT: Okay. Thank you. It’s admitted. CROSS EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MS. HOFFMAN Q What will the schedule be like with this employment? A Well, when I was offered the job--my boss is a woman. And because we--we--the whole mission is girls education, you know, I said “I’m in this rather difficult custody situation, and I don’t want to lose primary residence. ‘That’s really important, and I need to-~I need to demonstrate to the Court that I will continue to make sure that the father has the exact same time that he has now. It would just be a different configuration." and she said ‘Absolutely. I support you a hundred percent.” I said “I would need to- MR. WAXMAN: Objection, hearsay. WITNESS: I would need-~ COURT: Sustained. WITNESS: I would need to fly back every other Thursday. 60os 10 a 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And she said “That's absolutely fine.” I have a very flexible work schedule, and a number of the other staff in her center are also single moms. So it’s a very supportive environment. I also said I didn’t want my child to be in school or child care, you know, from early in the morning until late at night. So I/d be leaving at three or four every day. » Oy oO PO DO CROSS EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MS. HOFFMAN What will your salary be-- It's a hundred-- --in this position? --and five thousand. Per year? Per year. When do you intend to relocate? I've given my official thirty day notice, as I was required to by the Court, and January 18th is the official day of the thirty days, if I’m allowed to do that. And what were--what will your living arrangements be in Washington? Well, as the Court knows, she just got accepted at Aidan Montessori. She'd been accepted in a different Montessori that had a place, but Aidan is really just-- it's an incredible school. And it goes all the way up through sixth grade. So she would be--it‘s not just a 61 | | | |10 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 preschool. It would be a long-term sustainable--we'd be part of that community for a long time. And it’s right next to my office. It’s about three blocks away. So I/d like to take an apartment there. JI haven't signed on anything yet because I didn’t know what would happen with the relocation. So I took a temporary place, and I'd hoped to be able to be within a block or two of the school, so I could walk to school and then walk to work and be very close to her. Q And you mentioned the Montessori school. Is this a copy of the letter-- A Yes. Q — --you received-- A The acceptance letter. Q --from the Montessori school? A Yes, MS. HOFFMAN: IT would like to put Defendant’s 2 into evidence. MR. WAXMAN: Objection, hearsay. The reason I’m objecting-- COURT: What is Defendant's 2? MS. HOFFMAN: It is a letter from Aidan Montessori School, regarding the place Mila could have at the school. MR. WAXMAN: I'm objecting on hearsay grounds, Your Honor. I wouldn’t, if I had the entire written submissions from 6210 12 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 24 22 23 24 25 Aidan, but I’m objecting because this is a snapshot. I don’t think it’s helpful. MS. HOFFMAN: This is-- MR. WAXMAN: It's hearsay. MS. HOFFMAN: --the entire packet we've received from Aidan Montessori School. MR. WAXMAN; I object on hearsay. COURT: Well, it will be admitted. It’s--it’s Plaintiff’s 22 Or Defendant's 2, I mean? Is that right? MS. HOFFMAN: Yes. COURT: Okay. Thank you. CROSS EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MS. HOFFMAN What would you like Mila’s schedule to be at the school? A She would go in at eight. She has a late birthday. So she turns four after the cut off, right? Because she turns four--she would turn five November 29th. But, as I said, she tested so--I mean her reading and math skills, they were just amazing. So next year she’d actually be full day primary. This day [sic] she'd still be half day. So in the afternoons she gets to take a nap, and she goes with the other children. But she would be there from eight in the morning until three or four in the afternoon. Then we would return to Maine. and then during the summers what I was hoping was that, because Maine is a lovely place to be in the summer, you know, if 6310 aa 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the Court agrees with what we've proposed, Mr. Malenko could put Mila in a summer camp. And then my boss says that I could do Fridays from home in Maine, There is- they do have the short Friday workweek in Washington in general. So then I could do a long weekend with Mila in the summer, and she’d get to continue her community in Sorrento and friends she’s made there. And she could be in a summer camp here, and during the school year with me. Well, can you elaborate on your suggested plan for contact between Mr, Malenko- Yes. -and Mila? Yes. Well, as I said, it’s the exact same amount of time that Mr. Malenko currently has. It’s just a different configuration, and it’s one that allows me to, I hope, retain primary residence and employment, which is of course very important. And it’s actually a much easier schedule for me and Mila, because rather than doing eight hours of driving twice a week, it’s a fifty minute plane flight. And it actually doesn’t cost much more because I've been spending about three hundred dollars a month just in gas. And the plane, if you book them far enough in advance, it’s a direct flight on Air Tran. 1 can get it as low as sixty-two dollars. So, as I said, we have 6410 aL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 proposed Thursday through Sunday, every other week. So he’d have her every other week, Thursday through Sunday, plus holidays and summer. It’s a very expansive visitation schedule that we‘re proposing, and all of the burden of travel would be on me. And have you received a response from Mr. Malenko about that suggestion? No. As you just heard in the other testimony, I sent that letter, and the only response I got back was demanding to know where I would be employed and when i was planning to relocate, which I had said in the letter. Are there other opportunities for Mila in D.C, that aren’t available in Maine? Oh, everything. The school’s right next to the zoo. and she loves--what she wants to do when she grows up--she wants to take care of elephants. She’s fascinated with elephants. So when we were just down there, in fact, it was one of the nicest moments. We went, and she’s very active. She’s a very high energy child. She has a tremendous amount of energy. She never stops moving. and she sat in my lap for twenty minutes and watched this elephant. She was transfixed. So everything in Washington’s free, the zoos, the museums. we went to the Aaron [phonetic] Space Musewn, which she loved. I mean, I think Washington D.C., as far as what it can offer a 6510 a 12 B 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 child, is pretty much beyond compare. There’s the National Ballet School. She’d love to take ballet lessons. She'd love to take misic lessons. There's a very famous music school. I mean, you just have tremendous resources there. You have all the embassies. You have an international community. Would you be able to have a job making your salary or in your field, anywhere in the New England Region? No. I mean, that’s like being a foreign service officer. As I said, I mean if I was a foreign service officer for the State Department, you work in Washington or you’re located overseas. And my career is exactly that, except it’s not for the U. S. Government. It's for non- . governmental organizations. But we work closely with the U. S, Government. So this new job is a U. S. Government grant completely. It's a thirty-three million dollar government grant. But there’s nothing like that. I had oxfam actually has an office in Boston, and I had applied to that position because I thought that that’s very close. ‘That would be even closer than Sorrento to Portland, but I didn’t get that position. So I had tried. and beyond oxfam, there’s really nothing. How do you plan to continue to nurture a bond between Mila and Mr. Malenko-- Well, I-- 6610 a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 --if you're in D.C.? --think the visitation schedule sort of speaks for itself. I mean, my understanding in normal cases, when the relocation happens with the primary parent, that it’s usually summer and school holidays. And for a mother to say “I will come back every other weekend. I will change my entixe professional schedule and work around this to maintain that," I think it’s--I think it’s extraordinary. My goal is to demonstrate to the Court that I’m serious about this, and I will do what I’m supposed to do, and I have done what I've been ordered to do. and I’ve done it, you know, to the letter. MS. HOFFMAN: I have no further questions. COURT: Thank you. Any further direct? MR. WAXMAN: Just briefly, Your Honor. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. WAXMAN Dr. Handrahan, you’re aware that back on May 21, 2009 you filed a motion to change--to amend child support, right? I’m not sure. Okay. well, you lost your job with CARE in July of 2009, right? I believe so. okay. And you haven't produced a child support affidavit from the time of the divorce until today, am I right? I don’t believe so. I’m quite sure Mr. Harwood has 6710 at 12 13 14 15 16 ay 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 oO» Oo Dp submitted one. All right. But you are employed, is it correct to say, from--starting in July--certain jobs you mentioned on the stand earlier, which garnered you a wage of about forty- five thousand dollars in 2009, is that right? I’m sorry, 2010. Yes. Okay. And you're aware that the child support that Mr. Malenko has been paying was premised at the time of the @ivorce judgment on the idea that the child was in full- time daycare, correct? Yes. All right. and that cost was two hundred and sixty-five dollars per week, right? I don’t have the affidavit. I'd be happy to show you the divorce judgment. If you turn back--I'1l get it for you, the child support worksheet. And the child support worksheet indicates two sixty-five a week-- Yes. --for child care, correct? Correct. Okay. And Mr. Malenko has been paying child support, based in part on that cost since the time of the divorce judgment, right? 6810 a 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 oO» Oo Pp Not correct. Okay. Well, you know that he’s been paying because DHHS has actually made him pay directly out of his wages, every week for at least the last year, correct? Well, Mr. Waxman, you asked if Mr. Malenko had paid child support. He ignored the very first judgment. He then stopped paying child support on the second judgment, which is when I finally went to DHS. and I did implement the income withholding order that Judge Moskowitz had originally issued. I didn’t implement that at first, because I was trying to reduce the conflict. Okay. Let me stop you there. And at that point-- Starting at the time when you implemented the withholding order, he’s been paying, -- He has. correct? Correct. All right. But that’s not a fair number, is it, because you are no longer making the same salary you were and you don’t need-- MS. HOFFMAN: I would object to the relevance. MR. WAXMAN: Well, I/1l respond to that. Your Honor, as part of what you're [sic] going to be asking the Court to do, we're going to be asking the Court, at least with regard to 69