ۥ-x@-x#vavaavevevevmvvvvvv v vvOx7x(xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:xxxxxxHIMPORT  FAMILY COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X SUSAN SAMORA, Docket #0-972-98 Petitioner, FU #53516 -against- PHOTIUS COUTSOUKIS, Respondent. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X Richard J. Daronco Court House 111 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. White Plains, New York March 22, 1999 B E F O R E : HON. INGRID S. BRASLOW Family Court Judge A P P E A R A N C E S : Mark Domicello, Esq. Attorney for Petitioner Photius Coutsoukis Appearing Pro Se Robin Kotler, Esq. Law Guardian SANDY SAUNDERS REPORTING Bank of New York Building Two New Hempstead Road, Suite 303 New City, New York 10956 (914) 634-7561 IMPORT  COURT OFFICER: Your Honor, this is numbers one, two and three on the afternoon calendar in the matter of Samora and Coutsoukis. Counsel, please note your appearances first, starting on the Judge's left. MR. DOMICELLO: Mark Domicello, assigned counsel for Susan Samora. MS. KOTLER: Robin Kotler, Law Guardian. COURT OFFICER: Thank you. All other parties please raise your right hands. Do you both swear to tell the truth, so help you God? MS. SAMORA: I do. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I do. COURT OFFICER: Your name? MS. SAMORA: Susan Samora. COURT OFFICER: Your name? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Photius Coutsoukis. COURT OFFICER: Thank you. Please be seated. THE COURT: All right. We're scheduled for a continuation of the Fact Finding Hearing under Docket 0-972 of 1998. Ready to proceed, Mr. Domicello? MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Ready to proceed, Ms. Kotler? MS. KOTLER: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: And Mr. Coutsoukis, ready to proceed? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. THE COURT: All right. Just a little bit of housekeeping. You have before you a decision that was rendered by this court on the motion submitted by Mr. Coutsoukis, Docket X-307. There will be added to today's calendar Docket X--which had been docketed as X-307--it will now be re-docketed as X-349 of 1999. It is the Order to Show Cause filed by Mr. Coutsoukis for assigned counsel to submit to a polygraph test. In addition, adding to today's calendar is Docket X-210 of 1999, the law guardian's motion to require Mr. Coutsoukis to submit to a psychiatric evaluation. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Question, Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes? MR. COUTSOUKIS: On that motion, shouldn't I have been permitted to defend myself before we go into such motions on this particular matter, the X-- THE COURT: I'll give you the opportunity this afternoon. As to the re-docketed motion, X-349 of 1999, Mr. Domicello, you want to be heard on that? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor-- Your Honor, my question--that the Order to Show Cause in that petition be dismissed. I have not been properly served with the Order to Show Cause itself. I have the Order to Show Cause here. It was sent to me by Fed-Ex, and it's not signed by any judge. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, it was dictated, including the signature, by Mr. Ed Mead (phonetic) on the phone exactly as I was supposed to do it. THE COURT: Will you accept service of it, Mr. Domicello? MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. All right, then do you want to be heard? MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, Your Honor. I really originally had made a request, Your Honor, last week--I'm sure the court has a copy--to be relieved of this matter by reasons being that I felt that in light of the personal attacks upon me by Mr. Coutsoukis, that I felt that my ability to represent my client may be compromised in some way. I rethought my request, Your Honor. I believe I can do a good job. I think I've done a good job for Ms. Samora throughout. I'm therefore withdrawing my request to be relieved in this matter. As far as the request I take a polygraph test, I think that is--there's no basis in law or fact in this court that would warrant this court to order or direct this assigned counsel to take a polygraph test. I am not a party to this action. I am not Mr. Coutsoukis' attorney. There is--any conversations had between me and him over the course of my representation are without prejudice and not admissible. This is not a criminal matter, beside the fact that any polygraph test that would be directed wouldn't be admissible in any hearing. This is not--once again, this is not a criminal matter and I'm not a party to this action. There's no--there will be no basis to direct the polygraph test and I argue a petition in Family Court. THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Kotler, do you want to be heard? MS. KOTLER: Yes, Your Honor. I was going to move to dismiss because I was not properly served, and I am pretty angry about the fact that every time Mr. Coutsoukis does a motion or an Order to Show Cause, he does not send me the proper affirmation, affidavits, or exhibits. And in his affidavit to the court, paragraph twenty-eight, affidavit dated 1/30/99, he clearly states that he is deliberately refusing to send me this material, which prejudices my client and is disrespectful of the office of law guardian and disrespectful of a court and the judicial process. I cannot properly represent my client when I don't--this is all I got, Your Honor. This top cover sheet, unsigned, no affidavit, no affirmation. I have no idea what this is about. I would ask this court to direct him-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That's the Order to Show Cause? MS. KOTLER: To send me all the proper papers. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Kotler. Do you want to say anything, Mr. Coutsoukis? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, that's the Order to Show Cause she's holding, okay? And also she did receive an affidavit with that Order to Show Cause. I did send it to her. I have tried to send to her the documents by Fed-Ed which would require a signature so we know she has them. She has refused those. When I send them by mail, now she says she does not--there was one set of exhibits which are already part of the record which I did not include and those are the only ones. Everything she's got since the last time. She got the same as the court and the same as Mr. Domicello. THE COURT: All right. MS. KOTLER: Your Honor? THE COURT: On Docket X-307-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to speak regarding his wanting to dismiss my Order to Show Cause. THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Mr. Domicello signed a document under the penalties or perjury, and I'm quoting the top line of his document, "Perjury is a crime." This is a criminal matter. The court does have the authority to order Mr. Domicello to take a polygraph test, and so do the authorities. And because Mr. Domicello's statements, which I have on tape--this is a very authentic tape and I will take it to a forensic lab to authenticate--indicate that he was ordered, directed by this court to answer my motion to recuse the judge. This is a very serious matter and I think the court should want to get to the truth of this matter, not to allow finessing out of it in this manner. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, your application--your Order to Show Cause will be denied in all respect. The court agrees with the assigned counsel. This is not a criminal matter. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Virtually? THE COURT: No. I'm sorry, sir. This is not a criminal matter. There is no basis for this court to order assigned counsel to submit to a polygraph test. He is not a party to this proceeding. Okay. Any motion that you may have made for this court to recuse itself was not-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Are we on the record? THE COURT: --was not received by this court. There was a previous motion to recuse that was already decided, and the court is not going to entertain that motion again. As to the law-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Are we on the record? THE COURT: I'm sorry? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Are we on the record, Your Honor? THE COURT: Oh, absolutely. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Thank you. THE COURT: We don't do anything that is not on the record, Mr. Coutsoukis. As to the law guardian's motion, X-210, that motion will be held in abeyance until the completion of the Fact Finding Hearing. MS. KOTLER: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed now with O-972 of 1998. All right. Mr. Domicello, Ms. Samora was on the witness stand. MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Before we do that, I have a statement, Your Honor. I would like to ask the court to please strike from the record a false and prejudicial, irrelevant statement made by Mr. Domicello last time, and I am reading from the transcript of December 1, 1998, page twenty-seven, lines twenty-two through twenty-five, and page twenty-eight, lines two through four. Quote, "Mr. Coutsoukis, as he stated, believes he has no knowledge of any of the doctors, any of the medical providers, that my client has chosen to care for this child, and that just shows where Mr. Coutsoukis is coming from," unquote. I did not make such a statement, so I move the court to strike that passage from the record. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Domicello, do you want to be heard? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, what I state on the record is my belief and that my belief is culled from the facts and evidence presented in that case, and I stand by that statement. MR. COUTSOUKIS: That's not what you said. MR. DOMICELLO: I believe that--may I finish, please? I believe that not only has--is that my belief, but as also believed by the law guardian in this case. And that is once again taken from the statements that Mr. Coutsoukis has made both in and outside this courtroom. There is no basis for that--those statements to be stricken from the record. Mr. Coutsoukis has not presented any law or fact which would warrant this court to strike those statements and, therefore, I would object. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, he stated--he said, Mr. Coutsoukis, as he stated. I did not state such at any time in this court, or outside this court for that matter. This court has not heard me state such a thing. There's nothing of this sort on the record. He says I did so and puts that on the record. It should be stricken. THE COURT: That will remain on the record. The motion to strike is denied. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I also move this court to strike from the same transcript all testimony by Mr. Domicello and Ms. Kotler regarding my mental health. They are not sworn witness--they are not sworn witnesses. They are lawyers appointed by the Judge and they have absolutely no business testifying, and absolutely no expert or other authority to be making these false and scurrilous psychological evaluations of me. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, what we've made, me and Ms. Kotler--I believe she will back me up on this--we made an application to this court to order a psychological evaluation based on Mr. Coutsoukis' actions both within and without this--and outside this court. I did not make a diagnosis, nor did I pretend to be an expert in the area. I simply made an application to have this court direct that Mr. Coutsoukis be evaluated by a professional. THE COURT: All right. MS. KOTLER: Yes. THE COURT: Do you want to be heard, Ms. Kotler? MS. KOTLER: Your Honor, I would say the same thing. We're making an application. My application--I've also got a motion here. It's my belief based on my conversations with him, observations, being in and out of the courtroom. And I'm not representing that I'm a psychiatrist. THE COURT: Those statements will remain on the record. They will not be struck. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Those characterizations remain? THE COURT: Everything that was said in the courtroom remains on the record. MR. COURTSOUKIS: Okay. For the record I would like to state that this court, citing technical reasons, refused to sign my subpoena duces tecum which requested the petitioner's psychiatric records while, in the past, no technicalities stood in the way of inhuman treatment of me and my daughter by this court. Also, for the record I would like to note that when there is a disagreement, Ms. Kotler's opinion is employed as a tie breaker, as if this were a beauty contest, and that doing so in describing my daughter's medical condition is very inappropriate. Furthermore, there is no basis for the petitioner having coming in with a petition for telephone annoyance to have the court assign counsel, and there's absolutely no legal basis for the law guardian. And both of these court-appointed attorneys are here apparently to lend credibility to judicial decisions and to false accusations. THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed. Okay? Mr. Domicello, your client will be recalled to the witness stand at this time. MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: She'll be sworn in and we'll proceed with cross-examination. I'll give you a certain amount of time within which you can do your cross, but I do want to conclude the hearing today. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I believe that would be unfair because the other side had already three meetings. I have not had a chance to cross-examine the witness and I have not had any chance to testify in over two years. THE COURT: Let's go. Let's not waste anymore time. COURT OFFICER: Raise your hand, please. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? MS. SAMORA: I do. COURT OFFICER: State your name for the record, please. MS. SAMORA: Susan Samora. THE COURT: All right. Proceed, Mr. Coutsoukis. CROSS-EXAMINATION OF MS. SAMORA BY MR. COUTSOUKIS: Q Isn't it true that you and I have known each other for over twenty years approximately? A Approximately. Q To your knowledge, is it true or false that I suffer from chronic back problems? A Yes. Q During the last hearing, did you state, quote, "I guess I did," unquote, in response to my question as to whether you lied in your resume? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. I don't believe that was her testimony. I objected to that question. I objected to Mr.-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: She can answer. THE COURT: No. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She can answer. THE COURT: No, no, no. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, can I please finish my question? THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, let him finish. MR. DOMICELLO: And I believe I objected when Mr. Coutsoukis attempted to place some documents, which I believed to be my client's resume, into evidence, and that was sustained. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: No, that was the--actually-- THE COURT: No, no, no. COURT OFFICER: Sir? THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: You cannot ask that question. Q Did you at any time lie in your resume regarding your education? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance to this matter? THE COURT: Objection sus-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: The relevance to this matter is that the petitioner's honesty or lack thereof--she has a long history of perjury--in a case where there has been absolutely no evidence to support her allegations is crucial. They have questioned my mental health, among other things. It is imperative that I be allowed to expose the petitioner's character. MR. DOMICELLO: Well, then Mr. Coutsoukis should present evidence that my client permitted perjury in this courtroom or on her petition within this matter. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: You will sustain the objection? THE COURT: Yes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Is the reason we're here today your petition of 00-972-98, the Order of Protection? A I'm not sure of the number. Q Are we here because of a petition you filed for an Order of Protection? A Yes. Q And you have come to court in connection with this petition four times already? A If that's how many times-- Q Have you come--is this the fourth time you've come here since you filed-- A I don't remember it. If that's-- Q Did you go in front of a judge other than Judge Braslow or Judge Tolbert and then you came here? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm going to object to the relevancy of that question. A I don't--I-- MR. DOMICELLO: We're here for a petition today, not for prior petitions. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Based on what the petitioner told me, she is under the impression that I have been bringing her to court the last few months. Perhaps if she understood that this was her action and that she can spare everybody the agony-- THE COURT: Ask a question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She might decide to-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: --to withdraw it. THE COURT: She testified on direct examination. You cannot ask her--I'm sorry, on direct examination. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She did not answer. THE COURT: You cannot ask her to withdraw her petition. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I was asking whether she's aware that we are here for the fourth time because of a petition she filed for an Order of Protection. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, that's also outside the scope of direct examination. THE COURT: She asked and answered. Let's just confine ourselves to what she testified to-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can she be allowed to answer? THE COURT: --on direct. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can she be allowed to answer? THE COURT: Let's proceed. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q To the best of your knowledge, am I decent, hardworking and caring and generous? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, I'm going to object to that question. There's no relevance for that question to be answered, and it's also out of the scope of direct examination. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, there are (inaudible) that we have two court-appointed lawyers-- THE COURT: No, Mr. Coutsoukis, let's not go there again. The objection is sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: My character-- THE COURT: Ask another question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: My character is an issue here. THE COURT: Let's move on. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Have I treated you with compassion and generosity over the years? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. DOMICELLO: Same objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The last time I brought a part of Susan's divorce petition, to which Mr. Domicello objected citing technicalities that I believe have no bearing. I brought the complete and original set of documents that was served by the petitioner. I would like to present them as exhibit here. THE COURT: This is cross- examination. Ask her a question, please. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can I not give her a document to look at? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, there's no question before the court. THE COURT: What is the question? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Did you lie under oath when you filed a divorce petition in Ventura County? Yes or no? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, same objection I made with reference to the--my client's resume. Same objection. THE COURT: Objection sustained. Mr. Coutsoukis, again, confine your questions to this petition only. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. This petition is based on statements made by the petitioner-- THE COURT: No. Just ask her questions. MR. COUTSOUKIS: --strictly-- exactly--and I would like to-- THE COURT: Sir? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying. THE COURT: You are. Just ask her a question based on her testimony. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q In your amended petition, it says that the respondent--did you say, The respondent blames me for our daughter's medical condition? Is that what you're claiming that I have-- A That's what it says. Does it--if it says there, I-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Can I present to you, Your Honor, with a lethal weapon used in attempting to heal my daughter repeatedly? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. If Mr. Coutsoukis--first of all, there's no question here. Second of all, he's presenting you with something allegedly--he's not even asking that it be marked for identification--and-- THE COURT: No, you cannot present me with this, Mr. Coutsoukis. MR. DOMICELLO: And-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. The question was about--the question was about whether she is or not responsible to be blamed for my daughter's condition, and I would like to show that she is. THE COURT: Well, what is-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That is in the petition. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: What is the question? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Again-- THE COURT: What is the question? MR. COUTSOUKIS: The question is, Did you try to kill Teddy? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, we're here for Order of Protection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Will they allow her to answer one question? MS. SAMORA: Absolutely not. MR. DOMICELLO: My client has alleged-- THE COURT: No, no. Just a moment. Just a moment. MR. DOMICELLO: My client has alleged that Mr. Coutsoukis committed acts, criminal acts, which would warrant this court granting an Order of Protection, not whether or not my client is responsible for any problems or illnesses that the parties' child has. MR. COUTSOUKIS: You put it in the petition. I didn't. THE COURT: Okay. Just a minute, Mr. Coutsoukis. MR. DOMICELLO: The fact that Mr. Coutsoukis continually blames my client and harasses her and annoys her is the basis for the petition, not whether or not my client is guilty of such. THE COURT: All right. Ms. Kotler, do you want to be heard? MS. KOTLER: Your Honor, I was just going to say that he--Mr. Coutsoukis misstated his own question. That is not what he asked this witness. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Would you like to state it for me correctly? MS. KOTLER: No, I would like you to restate your question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Did you try to kill Teddy, our daughter? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. You don't like this question? Okay. Q Did you state in your complaint that I blame you for our daughter's medical condition? Is it your contention that I blame you for Teddy's medical condition? A Yes. Q Okay. Would you please examine this? This is for my question, and please keep it in the plastic so that we don't contaminate the evidence. Would you please pass it on? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, if--I'm objecting, Your Honor, to this. There is--this is not--he's not being asked that any of this evidence be marked in evidence and, once again-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: May I-- MR. DOMICELLO: I'm objecting to any evidence being presented that has to do with my client's alleged acts against the daughter. That's not what we're here for. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, what are you holding in your hand, in a plastic bag? MS. SAMORA: Crackers. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is-- maybe the petitioner can tell-- THE COURT: No, just tell me. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is-- THE COURT: No. I'm asking-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: --poison to my daughter. THE COURT: What is it? MR. COUTSOUKIS: It is brown rice snaps. My-- THE COURT: Brown rice snaps? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Correct. My daughter was placed by the petitioner, her choice, into a ketogenic diet, which is a set diet, and this is pure carbohydrates and it can induce seizures, of which there were two huge ones that the petitioner took my daughter into the emergency-room and then she was admitted in the hospital after that. THE COURT: Okay. Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: All right. She can kill my daughter. I cannot-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. I ask that that be stricken from the record. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: No, no, no, no. Please, Mr. Coutsoukis. That will be struck from the record. Q Did your first complaint state that I will--that the--I, the respondent, will be deemed to examine our daughter's body for bruises right out in the street? A Yes. Q And didn't you under oath, the last time we were here when Mr. Domicello asked you that, you said, No, it was in the police station? A I mean, sometimes it's outside, in the police station. It happens, you know, no matter where you see her. Q But isn't it true that last time you said otherwise that, No, it was at the police station? A It happened-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, this is argumentative. I'm objecting and, second of all, my client's testimony, I believe the last time, was that it was in public. Inside a police station could be in public. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, which is not the same as on the street. THE COURT: The court-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: It says, In the street. THE COURT: The court agrees with you. Mr. Coutsoukis, objection sustained. MR. DOMICELLO: Okay. THE COURT: And the record will speak for itself. Q Did you say that I lifted a long dress to look at her knees, or up to her knees? A Yes. Q Okay. Can you tell us on how many occasions in the last two years or so since Teddy and I have been separated you have brought Teddy to me wearing a dress? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. The time frame--we're here for a petition that has a certain time frame and it does not go back two years, and I'll object to that question. It's over broad. THE COURT: All right. The objection will be sustained to the extent that it goes back for two years. You can rephrase. Q Okay. How many times have you brought Teddy to me wearing a dress? THE COURT: Within what period of time? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Within the period of time that Mr. Domicello chooses. MR. DOMICELLO: To what? THE COURT: No, you're the one who has to ask the question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: June? Is June okay? July? September? MR. DOMICELLO: I'm not testifying, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. MR. DOMICELLO: I don't have to answer his question and I'm not going to. Q Since June. Since June of 1998, how many times have you brought Teddy to the police station for me to take her home wearing a dress? A Well, I can think of one specifically, and in the summer she'd be wearing shorts, so you always examined her with shorts on. Q How many times have you brought her to me wearing shorts since July 1998? A A lot in the summer. She was pretty much always wearing shorts. Q Until when? A Well, then, you know, when the seasons change, then--and then for her birthday was when she had her dress on. Q And when was her birthday? A September 28. Q Okay. And before her birthday, was she wearing long slacks? A I don't know. I mean, if the weather-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I believe that's been asked and answered. THE COURT: I'll allow it. Q Isn't it a rule-- A If the weather was-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Thank you. Q Isn't it a rule that you bring Teddy to me almost always, most of the time, as a rule wearing long slacks? A It depends upon the weather. I mean, if it's hot, she wears short. Q What percentage of the time have you brought Teddy wearing anything--anything other than long pants at the police station in Ossining in front of the policemen? A I don't know. Q Guess. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. A Like I said, it was whether-- THE COURT: I'm sorry. Just a minute. There's an objection. What-- MR. DOMICELLO: That question's been asked and answered. My client says she doesn't recall, and that's as far as that question should be allowed to be asked. THE COURT: Objection sustained. Q Now-- MR. DOMICELLO: But Mr. Coutsoukis is asking her to guess. Q When you said--when you said that I lifted her skirt up to her knees, was she wearing any tights underneath? A No. Q And did I--were there any bruises on her legs--any black and whites? A Black and blues, you mean? Q Black and whites? A Blues. Q Okay. Black and blues. Yes. A Right. Q I'm sorry. Okay. And is there a reason why that is in the--your complaint of--why is that in your complaint? What is the problem with that? A I feel that to lift a child's legs to look at bruises and-- Q Lift her legs, you say? A I mean, to lift her skirt, to look at her legs to check for bruises I feel is invasive to her. Q Invasive to her? A It implies that something is happening. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, can my client finish a question before Mr. Coutsoukis interrupts every time? THE COURT: Yes, please. Let her finish. Okay. Q And would you say it is more or less invasive than an unsolicited genital and anal examination, including photos? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, I'm not able to ask anything here. THE COURT: No, but that's a clearly inappropriate question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is inappropriate? THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis-- Q Have you at any time subjected-- THE COURT: Ask another question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Have you at any time subjected Teddy to a genital--an unsolicited genital and anal examination by third parties, including photos? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She can kill her with murder. THE COURT: You heard me. No. MR. DOMICELLO: Object--I request that that be stricken, that last statement. THE COURT: Well, I'll strike it. And please do not make gratuitous remarks like that again. MS. SAMORA: Your Honor, am I allowed to say anything? Q You said--did you say in your complaint that when she'd say, B, I asked her whether she meant beat, meaning, did somebody beat her? A Yes. Q And how many times, on how many occasions did I ask that? A At least a couple of times. Q At least a couple of times? On two separate conversations? A Right. Q Separate conversations? A Right. Q Okay. And do you think it's wrong for a father to know if a child was beaten? To make her aware that she has to complain when somebody beats her? Is there something wrong with that? A Theodora-- Q Is there something wrong with a father asking that? We're not talking Theodora, we're asking the father asking. A We are talking Theodora. MS. KOTLER: Objection. A We are talking Theodora. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Objection to what? THE COURT: To your question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Of whether it is wrong for a father to ask that? THE COURT: Yes. It's not relevant. MR. COUTSOUKIS: On what basis? THE COURT: It's not relevant to this proceeding. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It is absolutely relevant because I'm being accused of harassment. Harassment for the Penal Code has everything to do with intent. If we cannot prove my intent, we are not proving harassment. If I'm not allowed to ask the petitioner--the witness about defense, we cannot prove my innocence, can we? THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Move on. Q Did you not ask in your original petition to this other judge, not Judge Braslow, Judge Tolbert, in your petition for an Order of Protection to limit the exchange to five minutes? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Okay. Did Judge Tolbert, this other judge, when granting you a temporary Order of Protection mention anything in it about limiting the exchange to five minutes? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Okay. In your--when you saw Judge Tolbert on September 25, and you were asked whether you were divorced, did you say, "Well, I hope," unquote? You don't know what you said? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: What grounds? THE COURT: Not relevant. Q Would you feel more divorced if I had moved to Africa and never heard from me again? MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Did you--when you presented the other judge with a fax as evidence, can you tell us what that fax said? Do you recall what was on that fax? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm being accused of sending her a fax. I wanted to know what the fax says. Why are we--what is the objection here? MS. KOTLER: My-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm being accused of sending her a fax that was bad, and I'm asking her to say what was on that fax. THE COURT: Ask your questions as to the proceedings before this court, not before Judge-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. The proceeding befor this court is for the Order of Protection. THE COURT: Not before Judge Tolbert. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Well, this proceeding is a result of a complaint she filed in front of Judge Tolbert in which she had it attached-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, we're here for a Fact Finding Hearing, not an application for a temporary Order of Protection. That has been granted already. Mr. Coutsoukis never attempted to have that temporary Order of Protection vacated. We're not here for that. It's irrelevant. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have asked for it to be dismissed repeatedly. THE COURT: Objection sustained. Let's move on. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have asked for it to be vacated. Okay? THE COURT: Let's move on. Q Isn't it true that even though you complain about faxes, your temporary Order of Protection under which I am currently refrained says absolutely nothing about faxes? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm going to object. My client's petition is what's before this court, not what is in--what Mr. Coutsoukis is directed to do in the temporary Order of Protection. THE COURT: The court agrees with you. Objection sustained. Next question? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, I would like to state for the record-- THE COURT: Next question? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Next-- Q Did you bring that fax into this court to introduce as an exhibit? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, which fax is Mr. Coutsoukis referring to? MR. COUTSOUKIS: The one that last time you asked the court to find in the folder--in the file. You asked the court, the clerk--Mr. Domicello asked the court clerk last time to look and find the fax that Ms. Samora brought to the other Judge-- THE COURT: Okay. She can answer the question. Q Did you bring in that fax as an exhibit-- A Yes. Q --to show-- A Yes. Q Okay. Can you tell us what's in it? Does it have something to do with my saying that there are records missing, medical records or educational records? A Oh, yeah. I think it--I think it was a request about educate-- Q Something about-- A About-- Q Yes? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. My client--can my client answer the question without Mr. Coutsoukis interjecting? THE COURT: Let her answer the question. Don't make gestures to her, Mr. Coutsoukis. A It was about--I think it was about educational records or ophthalmology records or medical records. I'm not sure which ones. And then there was a threat that if--I think it was--the 25th was what day? It was a Friday. Is that last year? Yeah, it was a Friday--that if--that I did--if I didn't provide the records that I was going to be--you were taking me to court on Monday. Q Are you under court order to supply me with any records, medical or educational, which I'm not able to obtain from the providers? A Within--with a request and within a certain amount of time. And if-- Q And was this facsimile request-- A If--excuse me. Can I finish please? And if due diligence has not been made to the--whoever you're getting the information from, whether it's the school or the doctors. I mean, I can recall a time when I gave you the information from the ophthalmologist three times and you kept on claiming you never got it, so-- Q Say that again. A I said, I can remember one instance which--this really doesn't have any relevance here, so never mind. Q Okay. Thank you. During the period of time covered by this amended petition, did you provide me with an item of food when you sent Teddy over to my house about which I complained? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. MR. COUTSOUKIS: How is that irrelevant? THE COURT: I'll allow it if you'd be specific as to the date. A What are you talking about? What-- Q Well, I think we have agreed to a time period here at this time from July to December. THE COURT: No. Mr. Coutsoukis, you tell me. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: What time are you talking where she visits? Q We're talking about July of 1998. you sent with Teddy to my house an item of brown rice snaps. Did you? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. It's irrelevant to the allegations-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'll get to it. MR. DOMICELLO: --of this petition and it's outside the scope of direct examination. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Isn't it true that you use Orders of Protection as a method to deny me and Teddy access to each other? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. A No. THE COURT: No. It's sustained. Don't answer if it's--someone raises an objection. Q Isn't it true that the last time you were here--we were here, you said--you admitted that you had said to me that if I sent anymore exhibits, documents to you, you would consider them as harassment? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. I don't believe that was the testimony. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It was her testimony. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I-- THE COURT: That was not testimony. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It's in the transcript. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The transcript of the last time we were here. THE COURT: Well, if it's in the transcript, then it speaks for itself. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Ask another question. Q On March 14, 1999, did I call Teddy and you said that she was asleep? Did you--do you recall me calling and you said I couldn't speak with her, she was taking a sleep? She was asleep? A I don't know. Q You don't know? A I don't remember March 14. When was March 14? Q Do you remember September 1998? A Yeah, that's a different story. Q Do you remember September 1998? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. That's argumentative. A Yes. THE COURT: What is the question-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: September 1998? Q Did you-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, the question is, we can't remember March 1999, but we remember September 1998. That's the question. THE COURT: What is--no. MR. DOMICELLO: That's--and that's an objectionable question. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Did you hang up on me when I said that Teddy slept better when she was taking Frisium? A When she was taking what? Q Frisium, F-R-I-S-I-U-M. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. Q Did you hang up on me when I-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: We're talking about phone harassment here, Your Honor. Please. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor? MS. KOTLER: Objection THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, I have to defend myself on the basis of the Penal Code-- THE COURT: Please-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Definition of harassment. THE COURT: Please do. And the way you defend yourself is by questioning her as to her direct evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Correct. And that is-- THE COURT: All right. Can you do that? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. When she hangs up on me, that means she perceives some sort of intent-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying. MR. COUTSOUKIS: --which is the basis of the definition. THE COURT: You're testifying. Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: What am I allowed to ask her if anything? If she's not-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's up to you. I cannot tell you what you should ask. If you have no further questions, I'm going to conclude-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: No--yes, I certainly do have a lot of questions. THE COURT: I'm going to conclude the cross-examination. Q Do-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: No, I have plenty of questions. Q Do you know if it-- THE COURT: All right. Well, then, you will be given a few more moments, Mr. Coutsoukis. Make sure your questions are relevant. If they continue in an irrelevant manner, the court will cut off cross-examination. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I will try to be relevant, Your Honor, but like to remind the court-- THE COURT: I'll give you another few more minutes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. That for two years this court has heard over and over and over false accusations-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, let's move on. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have never had a chance to be heard. THE COURT: Let's move on right now. Q Do you not as a matter of course, when I bring up Teddy, her condition, and discuss it, hang up on me? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. It's irrelevant. MR. COUTSOUKIS: How can that be irrelevant? We're talking about my calling her and she considers this harassment. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, Ms. Samora has alleged that Mr. Coutsoukis has harassed her through calls and other means. The content of those conversations--whether or not he calls her--are not really relevant in this matter. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The content of the conversation that she considers harassment is not relevant? MR. DOMICELLO: What my client-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: What is relevant? MR. DOMICELLO: What my client says in response to harassing calls is not relevant. Whether or not Mr. Coutsoukis-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I did not ask her what she said. I asked whether she hung up. MR. DOMICELLO: Whether Mr. Coutsoukis made the call-- THE COURT: I'm going to allow him to ask the question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q When I ask if--when I mention that on the phone to you that Teddy slept better when she was taken Frisium, did you not hang up me? THE COURT: No, not--no, no, no, no. No. Q Did you not--did you not as a matter--normally, as a matter of rule, as a rule, hang up on me whenever I bring up aspects of Teddy's condition in conversation on the phone? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. The-- THE COURT: It's vague and general. Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: No, I tried a specific one and that was-- THE COURT: No, Mr. Coutsoukis. Please. You don't have to respond-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: --every time I make a ruling. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: That is not necessary. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Do you feel that when I call and discuss Teddy, my intentions are to harass you? Do you feel that when I call and we have a conversation, whether I call Teddy or you, that when I discuss Teddy, to you that is harassment--harassing? Teddy's condition. A When you discuss Teddy, when you just want to discuss Teddy. Q Teddy's condition. Like Frisium, like her feet, like her-- A No, I don't think that's harassment. Q You don't think it's harassment? Okay. A Not if you--not if there's a continuing and if I--if I don't want to continue the phone call and I hang up and you continue to--continue to call, then I think it's harassment. Q Okay. Did I continue to call when you hung up on me when I asked about Frisium? A No. Q Okay. But you hung up on me. Was that an indication that you felt harassed? A No. Q You did not feel harassment? A I--wait a minute. Q Do you know why you hung up on me? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, when my client--ask one question at a time and not have these compound questions? THE COURT: I'm sorry, Mr. Domicello? MR. DOMICELLO: We have compound questions, Your Honor. I'm asking that Mr. Coutsoukis answer--ask one question at a time and my client be given an opportunity to answer. THE COURT: All right. I'm going to order that you cannot ask a compound question, but you should not ask-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: She asked the first one, I asked the second one. THE COURT: You should not ask her questions that call for a legal conclusion as well. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: By asking a question in reference to harassment, that is a legal conclusion and I will not permit her to answer that question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Did you--why did you hang up on me when I stated that I felt Teddy slept better when she was taking Frisium? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, it's irrelevant. Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to ask the witness to examine a transcript of a conversation that Mr. Domicello cited in the last hearing as an evidence of harassment. THE COURT: I don't know what you're referring to. A transcript of a conversation? MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is the conver--actual conversation that Mr. Domicello last time said, through the witness, constituted harassment, and I would like her to authenticate the contents so we can go over it to see whether indeed it was or was not harassment. THE COURT: Is this a transcript of a conversation over the telephone that you had-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That's right. THE COURT: All right-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: What is the objection? THE COURT: I'm not going to permit any transcript to be reviewed by this witness. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: It is not a transcript of a court proceeding or--the court has no knowledge of-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. May I ask her questions about the content of that conversation which she described as harassing her? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, this conversation-- THE COURT: I don't know-- MR. DOMICELLO: --takes place between whom? THE COURT: I don't know what conversation we're referring to. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is between Susan and myself. It took place in September. It was the last time I called the petitioner before months later when Mr. Domicello said to call her because she didn't know why the hearing was closed--adjourned. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor, to anything that I may have said, first of all. Second of all, a conversation between Mr. Coutsoukis and Ms. Samora, if it's not part of the allegation, not part of the petition, not part of direct examination, then I think it's objectionable and I'm-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is part of the petition and part of the examination. MR. DOMICELLO: Look, I don't know what your holding, but it's irrelevant what you're holding because it's not in evidence. THE COURT: What part of the petition are you referring to? MR. COUTSOUKIS: The one where she said I harassed her by telephone. And when we were here last time, she discussed the conversation. THE COURT: Well, why don't you just ask her a question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Tell us if the phone conversation is correct, whether it took place, and why you found it upsetting. MS. KOTLER: Objection, Your Honor. This is a compound question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. MR. DOMICELLO: And it's calling for a reasonable conclusion. Q Tell us whether this conversation took place. A So what is the question now? THE COURT: What--what-- Q And I'm going to read it. THE COURT: What time--what-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: September 1998, Your Honor. It was the day she filed the petition for an Order of Protection. THE COURT: What is the question? Q Susan, can we finish my discussion first? This child is out of the house, out of your sight from 9:30. Susan interrupts, Excuse me, you're editorializing. (Inaudible). I'm not editorializing. I'm asking, Susan. I know what the story is. (Inaudible). MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm going to object. Q And you think that it's not important. MR. DOMICELLO: Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying. He's not asking a question. THE COURT: Just a minute. Q The question is-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, wait. There's an objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying here. He's not asking a question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I am asking a question, whether the phone conversation is correct. Whether that took place. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, you're reading from a transcript that's not in evidence, and therefore the court will sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. I would like to be able to present the court with the facts of this matter, namely, that there has never been harassment by telephone to Susan. And I'm trying to-- THE COURT: No. Mr. Coutsoukis, you're making a statement that you will have the right to make when you testify. It is evidence. It's in the nature of evidence. What your role now is to ask her a question, not to testify. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, and I think I should be allowed to ask her-- THE COURT: Not to testify. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I am not-- right. THE COURT: And Mr. Coutsoukis, further, again, every time I make a ruling, you are argumentative. Accept my rulings, please, and then appeal it. That is the way to proceed. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, I wanted to ask her-- THE COURT: But you are requesting precious time of this court for you to have an opportunity to defend yourself, and that's what you should be doing and that's what you should be concentrating on. Not to debate every single ruling that I make. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I apologize, Your Honor. I just meant to ask her a question. The question being, Was the following conversation--did the phone conversation take place? It is different if I say it took place then if the petitioner says it took place because she is the accuser. And I would like her to state whether or not it took place. THE COURT: Again, Mr. Coutsoukis, just ask the question, please. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. But I'm not allowed to ask if this conversation took place you're saying? Okay. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, move on. Q Isn't it true that ever since Teddy's birth you have attributed ill intentions to my actions in order to justify your denial of my access to her? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Can you tell the court what you meant in response to, What did I do wrong? when you replied, quote, "You just are," unquote? MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q How many incidents of telephone harassment have you described during your appearance in front of Judge Tolbert, the other judge? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q How often do I call your home? A I had an opportunity-- Q How often do I call your home? MS. KOTLER: Objection. A May I answer the question? THE COURT: Overruled. MS. KOTLER: He's not letting her answer the question, Your Honor. THE COURT: Let her answer the question. A Okay. The last time we were in this court, I guess it was December 1, I had an opportunity to review the subpoenaed phone records, and from the date in June continuing on through September, there were some days where there were six, seven, eight and nine phone calls per day into my house at that time. Q How many times were there nine phone calls a day? A There were quite a few times. Q How many? A I don't know, but-- Q Guess. A I'm not guessing. The records-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Not-- A The records-- THE COURT: Sustained. Q Was it more than ten or less than ten? A There is a--there is-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. A There is a piece of paper that is very voluminous in the annals of this court that will tell you how many times you have called my house, okay? Q Okay. A And it is voluminous. It is over and above a normal phone conversation. Q So until that last time from July 1998 until the last time we were in court, would that be more than one hundred and fifty phone calls? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Speculation-- Q Can you guess that it was--can you estimate-- THE COURT: Look, I'm going to sustain-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: --the objection as to any answer that calls for her to guess. Q Did you not obtain an Order of Protection from this court last year, September 9, 1997, the year before last, now, as a result of a consent agreement which stated, quote, "No electronic communication between the parties?" Did you obtain-- A Could you ask that question again, please. I'm not--I have-- Q Did you obtain an Order of Protection from this court on September 9, 1997, which stated inter alia, quote, "No electronic communication between the parties," unquote? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm going to object. My client-- THE COURT: Sustained. Q Were you ordered by the Oregon court to seek a modification of the Order of Protection you got on September 9, 1997? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, there's a pattern here of the Order of Protection. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Outside the-- THE COURT: Sustained. Q Did I ever seek an Order of Protection against you? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Can you please tell the court how often I call Teddy, our daughter? A Every night. Q And do I have a choice in the matter or is it entirely under your control, your way? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Q Is it your-- THE COURT: I'll allow it. Q --choice? A Yes. Q Okay. Do you feel I should do like you wish when you wish as you wish because you got the kid? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Is it possible for me to call Teddy without calling your phone and your answering it? A No. Q And in your appearance before Judge Bruce Tolbert, the other judge, did you not say, quote, "He reads to her. He sings to her. It's wonderful," end quote? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q When I call Teddy, do I read to her? Do I sing to her? Is it wonderful? A Lately, it has not been. You're singing love songs. You used to read to her. You used to be very positive. Now, you stay quiet for twenty minutes of a half an hour conversation. I don't understand what's going on. She used to have a lot more fun when you used to read-- Q Is it wrong-- A --read to her and sing fun songs rather than, you know, love songs. Q So you think it was wonderful at the time you filed your complaint? A Right. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Q And when you-- MR. DOMICELLO: That wasn't the testimony of my client. He just asked the question, Was it more fun at the time she filed the petition? That is not the testimony of my client, so I object to that question as to form. THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection. Q When you said it was more fun then, was it wonderful then? A Yes. Q And was it wonderful like a sweet lullaby? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q How wonderful was it? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. It's irrelevant how wonderful his conversation was. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Would you say that Teddy and I are extremely found of each other? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Is your denial of access of Teddy and me caused her (inaudible)? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Does Teddy enjoy her conversations on the phone with me when I call everyday? MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor-- THE COURT: Sustained. Q Well, you stated last time that you think from the--did you not say that she can tell--even if she does not understand a word, the demeanor will make her uncomfortable? In particular, regarding the word, rape? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She said that. It's in the record. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Isn't it more often than not--isn't it true that more often than not you talk during my conversations with Teddy? You make noises with teacups, you ask Teddy questions, and other such activities? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Do you speak during my conversations with Teddy? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'll allow it. A Do I speak to--? To who? To Teddy? She could be showing me something or asking me something. Yes, I do. Q Okay. A If she's engaging me, I'm going to answer her. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, conversations between my client and her daughter are not relevant in this matter, and I'm objecting. Q Isn't it true that your hyperactive, attention deficit disorder makes it impossible for you to stay still and quiet-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q --during my conversations with Teddy? THE COURT: Sustained. Q How long do my conversations with Teddy last? A Approximately thirty minutes. Q And when did you start allowing daily conversations on the telephone between me and Teddy? A After the summer vacation. Q And isn't that because after she spent time with me all of a sudden she started learning things for the first time? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: What--what is the objection? THE COURT: Sustained. Move on. Q Did the conversations take place at a usual time? A Yes. Q And are these times when I would--other times when I would call earlier than the designated time? Have there been times when I called earlier than the designated time? A Yes. Q Are there times when I called Teddy later than the designated time? A Rarely. Q On March 14, Sunday, when I called to speak with Teddy-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I will withdraw the question, Your Honor. Q Do you consider my expression of opinion about matters pertaining to Teddy's health as harassment? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. It calls for a conclusion. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I beg your pardon? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor heard my objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. DOMICELLO: You don't need to. Q Are you allowing daily conversations now because the greater time I spend on the phone offers greater opportunities for you to find something to complain about? MS. KOTLER: Objection THE COURT: Sustained. Q Have there been times when you would send a request by fax asking me to call Teddy at a later time? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. It's irrelevant. MR. COUTSOUKIS: We just talked about it. We're talking about repeated phone calls. If she sends a fax asking me to call later, I have to call. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Mr. Coutsoukis has not filed any Family Offense petition alleging harassment. What my client sends him by fax is not relevant-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: She sends a fax asking me to call. MR. DOMICELLO: --to allegations of this petition. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She's asking me to call her. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Have there been times when I would call Teddy and not be allowed to speak with her by you? That you would not allow me to speak with her? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'll allow it. A If it was an inopportune time, if we just sat down for dinner or she was about to get into her bath-- Q I didn't ask you why. I'm asking whether there have been times when you-- A Yes, there was--there have been times. Q Thank you. Does your phone have a volume control? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. A Yes-- THE COURT: I'll allow it. Q Do you have the ability to turn the ringer off if you don't want to receive phone calls? A Absolutely. Q Would you say that my conversations with Teddy give her and me great pleasure? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Mr. Coutsoukis-- Q What-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. I apologize. THE COURT: Just before you go any further, I just want to give you--I want to put you on notice now. I'm going to let you continue for ten more minutes, and then I'm cutting off cross-examination. Q How often did you allow me to speak with Teddy before the time after my vacation that you stated? A As the-- Q Was it once a week? A As the decree--as the decree--custody decree or divorce decree noted. Q I just asked you how many times. A Once a week. Q Once a week? Okay. And then after her vacation we switched to daily, correct? A Right. Q Okay. And did you not prevent us from speaking with each other in order to break our strong bond? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Have you seen the medical and educational records that I submitted to this court and to the Oregon court when I petitioned them to modify the custody and visitation order? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Isn't it true that Teddy deteriorated after my separation from her? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Isn't it true that more often than not you would hang up the telephone in the middle of our conversation after a few minutes, prior to switching to daily? In other words, when I had weekly--when I called Teddy weekly as you stated, would you after a certain amount of time hang up on us? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. It's irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Have there been occasions when you said Teddy's not ready to speak with me and that you would call back when ready? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Well, okay, we're talking about repeated phone calls here. Has there been an occasion when I would call a second time because the first time you said you'd call back for me to call back? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying again. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Do you ring once and then that is the signal for me to call you back? A Yes. Q Okay. And do you do that in order not to pay for the cost of the phone call? A Yes. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'll chance it. I'll allow it. Q Does it follow then that a call from my phone over to yours shown on my bill could be a call that you initiated by ringing my phone once-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, the witness just testified and the argument was that-- THE COURT: Your question is not relevant-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: And I want to move on and you should move on. You don't have a lot of time left. Q Is it possible that a call to your number shown on my phone bill could be a call that you initiated by ringing my phone once? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. It's not relevant to this proceeding. Q If, when I call, your phone is busy or off the hook or you're having a long conversation or on the internet, does it follow that having gotten a busy signal I would keep trying to call you? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, when somebody calls over and over when the line is busy-- THE COURT: No. Mr. Coutsoukis-- MR COUTSOUKIS: It shows on that bill that she mentioned. THE COURT: Please, move on. Q After Teddy's vacation with me in the beginning, have you allowed calls to Teddy at different times such as Saturday mornings? A Yes. Q If I called Saturday morning and you did not answer and I left a message on your answering machine, would you sometimes return the call? A Yes. Q And would that return phone call normally consist of your ringing my phone once and hanging up? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Isn't it reasonable for me to call your number to try again to reach Teddy? MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q When you stated that you saw a volume of repeated phone calls, is it possible, did it occur to you that they were attempts to call when you were not there or busy? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. My client is not an expert on what would show up on the records of Bell Atlantic Telephone Company. THE COURT: Objection sustained. Q Did you call me to ask for money? MR DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Have there been occasions when I called Teddy and she was there and you said she was not? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Did you and I have a conversation on the telephone about the fax that you showed to Judge Tolbert? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Can you tell the court why you waited until Grandma left before you filed your request for an Order of Protection? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Teddy's grandmother. Okay. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm at a loss. THE COURT: All right. Then I'm going-- Q Is the letter-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. I'm sorry. THE COURT: I'll give you five more minutes-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: But I am trying to cut off any further questions at this time. Q In your testimony, did you state that I considered you and two assistants at the dentist holding Teddy down while the dentist worked on her to be amounting to rape? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, this is one of the things that she was complaining about. I would like to defend myself against the things she complained about. THE COURT: Why don't you rephrase your question and-- Q Is it not--is it false--is it inappropriate for a father to complain about his young daughter, his little girl, being held down by three adults while a professional is working in her mouth? Is it-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Is that harassment for a father to make such a complaint? MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. Calls for a conclusion. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Isn't it true that on February 19, when Teddy and I were playing at the police station, you asked the policeman to tell us to leave? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor-- THE COURT: There's no testimony about that. You haven't laid a foundation for that question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: And let me remind you before you go any further that your questions should be limited to her direct testimony. And you have three more minutes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: To her direct testimony? You mean when he was asking questions, Mr. Domicello? THE COURT: Yes, that's what-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That would be a rebuttal. That would not be a cross-examination, I believe. THE COURT: No. No. Mr. Coutsoukis, I'm talking about your cross-examination of this witness. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Forget his rebuttal. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: He knows his job. Q Isn't it true that you want the visitation exchange limited to a short period of time? MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Did you complain that the Ossining Police Station is inappropriate for the exchange because of the presence of policemen and possibly prisoners? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Q Can you tell us who chose the Ossining Police Station as the place for the exchange? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q Isn't it true that before the Ossining Police Station, for my request and as granted by court, the exchange was taking place at the Peekskill Police Station? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can I ask her to identify a document? THE COURT: You have two more minutes. Q Last time-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can we bring, Your Honor, the exhibits that she brought in? THE COURT: Which exhibits? MR. COUTSOUKIS: That is the exhibit "1" that is a transcript from 1983. THE COURT: Exhibit "1" is a fax. MR. COUTSOUKIS: No, there was another exhibit which is a transcript of a television show. THE COURT: There is no transcript of the television show in evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: With notes in the margin from me. THE COURT: I'm sorry? MR. COUTSOUKIS: With notes on the margin. Notes from me-- THE COURT: There is no transcript-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: It was the testimony last-- THE COURT: There's no transcript of a television show in evidence. It's now-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can I present a fax--this is a fax that I received from the petitioner. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, it's improper. THE COURT: This is a fax that you received from this witness? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Asking me to call. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. It's not relevant to this proceeding. And it's now 3:30, and at this time the court is not going to permit any further cross-examination. Any redirect? MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, Your Honor. I'm asking for a five-minute adjournment. My redirect will consist of the records, and I'd like to have a chance to review them over the five-minute adjournment. THE COURT: All right. We'll take a five-minute recess. COURT OFFICER: Step out, please. (Off the Record) * * * THE COURT: Any redirect? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Your Honor, may I say something for the record, please? That I strenuously protest the fact that since the petitioner fled to New York, came to this court, where the court similarly and without a hearing separated me from my daughter. We have come here over and over and over while this court has refused to grant me one single hearing. And that limiting the time so strictly to where I can try to get some facts out of the petitioner is very prejudicial. THE COURT: So noted. Okay. Let's proceed. REDIRECT EXAMINATION OF MS. SAMORA BY MR. DOMICELLO: Q Ms. Samora, what is your telephone number? A Area code 914-941-2876, as of June of this year--June of last year. Excuse me. Q Is it true that at your direction I subpoenaed the records of Bell Atlantic? A Yes. Q From the periods between-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'd like to make a statement about these records in the first place. I had an opportunity to look at these records and Ms. Samora had an opportunity to look at these records. These records were in perfect order when we looked at them. All of a sudden, today, they're not. I don't know whether or not Mr. Coutsoukis had an opportunity to look at these records or whether he did or not. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Objection. I haven't been to this court since last time once. MR. DOMICELLO: I just want that noted, Your Honor. They're in disarray at this time and they were not. THE COURT: All right. That will be noted for the record. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I object to these fallacious accusation that have been thrown at me ever since I walked into the state. I have not been in this building since the last time. THE COURT: Mr. Domicello, let's proceed. MR. COUTSOUKIS: And Mr. Domicello-- COURT OFFICER: Sir? THE COURT: Okay. No more. Let her proceed. I'll allow a very few questions on redirect. Just a couple of questions. MR. DOMICELLO: My questions, Your Honor, will be limited to the phone records there were subpoenaed. Q That covers the period of the filing of the petition and until present? Is that correct? A I believe so. Q Is it true that on June 18, 1999, Mr. Samora--Mr. Coutsoukis called your house six times? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Objection. She has no way of interpreting the records as Mr. Domicello stated. These records would show whether there's no answer, they would show whether there's an answering machine, they would show when there's no ring. THE COURT: She can testify to that. She can answer that. Overruled. A As far as I read on the records. Q July 3, seven times? A As the records indicate. Q July 7, eight times? A Yup. Q July 9, seven times? A Yes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: May I look at those records, Your Honor, while she's answering? MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm-- THE COURT: Well, he hasn't asked to have them admitted into evidence, but you shouldn't be asking her questions from the documents if they're not marked in evidence. MR. DOMICELLO: I'm not. I'm asking her whether or not the calls were made, not whether or not they-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: She said from the records the only place she can tell-- THE COURT: Just a minute, Mr. Coutsoukis. Let me do this. You can ask her of her own personal knowledge whether she has that information. Q To your own personal knowledge, July 16, seven times? A I don't know. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I ask that these records be-- A I can--I can-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: She said she doesn't know. A I can speak of a pattern of continuous calls, but to remember dates, I don't remember. MR. COUTSOUKIS: He didn't ask about a pattern, Your Honor. Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm requesting that they be marked for identification. THE COURT: Okay. They'll be marked petitioner's Exhibit "4" for identification. MR. DOMICELLO: Oh, I'm sorry. There's one more piece here. THE COURT: I'm sorry, Mr. Domicello? MR. DOMICELLO: There was another part of it. MS. SAMORA: It's all part of it. THE COURT: All right. That's a part of Exhibit "4"? MS. SAMORA: Yes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Could I look at that please? THE COURT: Not now. It's supposed to be admitted into evidence. You'll have an opportunity to review it (inaudible). MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm requesting that these be marked in evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have an objection to that. THE COURT: Okay. MR. COUTSOUKIS: My objection is that these records are a violation of the privacy of my colleagues, my customers, my family, my friends and myself, and this is not the kind of case that merits taking every phone call made in months into evidence. That's my objection. THE COURT: All right. Show it to Mr. Coutsoukis and show it to the law guardian. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I am not the mafia. These are all January 1999 records. MR. SAMORA: Look at the date. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Oh-- MR. SAMORA: Top right. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Got it. Those just show that most of the calls have a duration of zero minutes. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It says zero. MR. DOMICELLO: Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying. THE COURT: Yes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Just so you know. THE COURT: All right. Ms. Kotler? MR. DOMICELLO: That's not the basis for an objection. MS. KOTLER: That's not a basis for not admitting the documents into evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: No, I understand. My objection was strictly on the matter of violation of privacy. THE COURT: I'll let the law guardian review it and then I'll respond to that. MS. KOTLER: No objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. The document will be admitted into evidence, Exhibit "4". The court does not find that there is a violation of anybody's right to privacy. There may be other people's telephone numbers. There's no identification of that party or what the conversations consisted of. The other way to do it, Mr. Coutsoukis, would be for you to stipulate that a certain number of calls were made on certain dates. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, I would like to now--to second what Your Honor said, mainly that there is no indication as to the contents of the conversations. These strictly indicate an originating ring. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, are you willing to stipulate that on certain dates that you did call her residence a certain number of times? MR. COUTSOUKIS: What I'm stipulating is that when I call and there's no answer, I can hang up and that shows a zero charge over there. And that what I'm-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, are you willing to stipulate on June 18 that you called her six times? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm requesting a stipulation on July 27 of twelve times. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm stipulating that those were attempted phone calls that were not complete because they were not there or because I got the answering machine and I hung up hoping that maybe I'll catch them later. That is not--zero--that's why it shows zero seconds. That does not mean that I made a phone call to her or that I spoke with her or that I harassed her. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, Mr. Coutsoukis is testifying. He read one page that said a zero minimum. We're not sure--the records are not-- THE COURT: All right. There's-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: You don't know how many pages I read, sir. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Coutsoukis, there's clearly no stipulation here. The document will be admitted into evidence and will speak for itself. MR. COUTSOUKIS: What--I'm sorry. There's no stipulation? THE COURT: No. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I did stipulate-- THE COURT: No. No, not-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That I did make calls and that they were not answered. THE COURT: No. That's-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That's why they show zero seconds. THE COURT: Okay. That's enough. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, let the document speak for itself. I have no further questions. THE COURT: Okay. Any questions, Mr. Coutsoukis? I'll give you an opportunity to inquire on recross. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Are you finished with your-- MR. DOMICELLO: Yes, sir. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: A couple of questions. MR. COUTSOUKIS: A couple of questions. THE COURT: You don't have to repeat everything I say. RECROSS EXAMINATION OF MR. SAMORA BY MR. COUTSOUKIS: Q Are there--were there occasions in June and July when I would call and Teddy had to go to the potty and I was asked to call back in a few minutes or that you would call me back as a signal to call back? A I don't know if that occurred in June or July, but it has occurred. Q Were there times when you would say Teddy is not ready to speak with me and that you would signal me to call later? A We addressed that, I thought. Q Can you answer it, please? MR. DOMICELLO: I'll object, Your Honor. THE COURT: It's been asked and answered. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Would you please give me those two pages, again? Would the clerk please read those pages again that Mr. Domicello mentioned, the June and July dates for the phone calls? THE COURT: June 18, July 8, July 16, July 27. MR. COUTSOUKIS: July 8, and, I'm sorry, what else? July? THE COURT: July 8, July 16-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: July 27. Q Okay. Where are those dates when Teddy was on vacation at my house, in other words, that she spent two weeks at a time at my house, two weeks in June and two weeks in July? A June 18th, she would have been--it started on the 5th--she would have been at your house. Q Okay. And June 5th as well. A June 12, same thing. Q And July 8? A July 8-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I believe I--well, I'm sorry, Your Honor. I believe, July 7 and July 9-- Q Okay. July 7 and July 9, was Teddy at my house on vacation? A Yes. Q Okay. Now, during Teddy's vacation in my house, did I try repeatedly to contact you so you can speak with Teddy to make her transition smoother? A I was allowed to speak to Teddy. Q And did we call you many times also? A Yes. Q Okay. And were there times when we would call--perhaps were there times during that period when you were not at home during the course of the day? A It's possible. Q Okay. And during the times when those phone calls were made, were you not at home--were you absent from home? A I don't know. Q Okay. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Am I allowed to ask questions from the previous testimony, Your Honor? I didn't finish. THE COURT: No. No, this is--we-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Regarding the visitation? No? THE COURT: This is a recross. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Strictly a rebuttal. THE COURT: Strictly a recross. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yeah. I again protest there has not been enough time for me to-- THE COURT: Okay. Any questions? MS. KOTLER: No, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: --to (inaudible) on Susan. THE COURT: All right. Thank you for your testimony. You can go back to your seat now. Any other witnesses? MR. DOMICELLO: None, Your Honor. THE COURT: You rest? MR. DOMICELLO: Yes. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Coutsoukis, your turn. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Start with testimony? THE COURT: It's up to you. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Or can I produce argument? THE COURT: You can make an argument. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I appreciate that. THE COURT: Is it-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Last time I was told my argument was testimony. THE COURT: Well, no. Let me just clarify to you what you can say. You can make a motion to dismiss limited to the testimony that was heard by this court. You cannot testify. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I am not allowed to testify? THE COURT: Not on the motion. You can testify after the court rules on the motion. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. If I make the motion to dismiss, can I still testify if it's not dismissed? THE COURT: Yes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Thank you. I would like to move-- THE COURT: And you'll do that right after. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to move that the frivolous, fallacious and scurrilous petition be dismissed with prejudice. And the reason for that is they have not proven any harassment as defined by the Penal Code which says, Harassment in the second degree, of which I'm being accused, when with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person, he or she strikes, shoves, hits, or otherwise subjects such a person to physical contact, or attempts to--or threatens to do the same; or, two, he or she follows a person in or about a public place or places; or, three, he or she engages in the course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such a person in which serves to (inaudible) person. This is Section 240.26 of the Penal Code, and I would like to emphasize the clause that says, with intent to harass. They have shown nothing that is harassing or that I had any intention whatsoever to harass. So I would beg this court to please dismiss this petition. I have never been a danger to anyone in my life. I have never owned any arms of any sort. I have never had a fight in my life, not even in school. I don't drink, I don't do drugs, I don't party. I am too busy working to make a living. This is a frivolous, unwarranted, fallacious, prejudicial petition. Please dismiss it with prejudice. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Domicello? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, you've heard testimony of my client. She makes allegations in her petition with regard to harassment and other crimes and, basically, has testified for an extensive period of time and has, what I believe, proven these allegations. We have phone records of Mr. Coutsoukis making telephone calls that are in evidence now. I could speak to them. There are days between June and September, some days ten, twelve calls a day. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Objection, Your Honor. We already established through her testimony-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That those were calls when Teddy was in my home and we called mommy. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Coutsoukis, the record will speak for itself. All right? Move on. MR. DOMICELLO: We're taking the light most favorable to the party moved against. I believe that there will no basis to dismiss this petition. I believe my client made a prima facie case in this matter for harassment, at least Subsection 3, which is engaging a course of conduct intended to annoy, alarm another person. I believe Mr. Coutsoukis has done so, my client has testified to that and, therefore, I request that Mr. Coutsoukis' application be denied. THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Kotler? MS. KOTLER: Your Honor, I think that the petitioner has made a prima facie case. THE COURT: Okay. The motion-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: May I just note that they have not. He stated that she has shown that I harassed when, in fact, she has not once shown that I had any intention or that she perceived any intention of my calls for the purposes of harassment. On the contrary. THE COURT: The motion to dismiss will be denied. Petitioner has made a prima facie case. Let's proceed. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: How do you wish to proceed, Mr. Coutsoukis? MR. COUTSOUKIS: As you know, I am not a lawyer. I am not--I have also-- THE COURT: How do you wish to proceed? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I think if I could be allowed to testify and do my arguments at the same time? THE COURT: Okay. Take the witness stand. You'll be sworn in. MR. COUTSOUKIS: And I would like to bring my documents with me then. MR. DOMICELLO: Absolutely not, Your Honor. I object to that whole heartedly. Mr. Coutsoukis is not going to be able to read from any document that's not in evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to introduce documents into evidence. THE COURT: You shouldn't read from doc--you can bring it with you, but you cannot look at it. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I cannot look at my documents? THE COURT: You cannot look at--you cannot read from a document if it's not evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, okay. THE COURT: In other words-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: That's right. THE COURT: Any statement that you're going to make to the court should not be as a result of perusing a document. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Should you want to have a document admitted into evidence, you can ask the court to do that. All right? MR. COUTSOUKIS: And then when I do that can I discuss the document after it's introduced into evidence? THE COURT: If it's admitted into evidence, I'll make a ruling at that time. Let the record reflect it's now two minutes after four. Over here. COURT OFFICER: Here, sir. MR. COUTSOUKIS: One more. COURT OFFICER: Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I do. COURT OFFICER: Please state your name for the record. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Photius Coutsoukis. COURT OFFICER: You may be seated. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to introduce this in evidence, Your Honor. THE COURT: I don't know what that is. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is an article, a newspaper article about me. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: And the reason I'm introducing it is because this is about my character and this is my first opportunity in two years to defend my character. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: A proper foundation is not laid. THE COURT: Objection sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Proper foundation. Okay. This-- THE COURT: It will not be admitted into evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It is my contention that this petitioner-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I would like to ask the court, what does Mr. Coutsoukis have in his lap that he's reading from--appears he's reading form? MR. COUTSOUKIS: It's my notes. THE COURT: Well, you cannot read from notes. You can make a statement to the court-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, Mr. Domicello-- MR. DOMICELLO: I request that they be turned over, Your Honor, so they're not seen. MR. COUTSOUKIS: --was asked-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, I told you before you got to the witness stand, you cannot read from a document. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is not exhibits. It's my notes. THE COURT: You cannot read from notes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Mr. Domicello read from notes-- THE COURT: No, please. MR. COUTSOUKIS: When he asked questions. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, do not be argumentative with me at every stage-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Every minute I make a ruling. MR. COUTSOUKIS: For the record, I'd like to state that whereas the other side referred to notes in getting testimony-- THE COURT: No. No, no. Don't-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I am not allowed-- COURT OFFICER: Sir? THE COURT: Don't do that. The signaling applies to both sides. And I made a ruling. Let's move on. It's now five after four. MR. DOMICELLO: I'd like to note, my client never read from a document while she was testifying and Mr. Coutsoukis should not be allowed either. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Mr. Domicello read from notes-- THE COURT: No. COURT OFFICER: Sir. THE COURT: No more. You have a statement that you want to make to the court? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I can no more memorize my testimony than the petitioner did. The petitioner's testimony was-- THE COURT: Do you have a statement that you want to make to the court? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I do, but I have to be able to refer to my notes. THE COURT: No, Mr. Coutsoukis. I want you to not refer to any notes. I want you to-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I consider this very prejudicial. THE COURT: Do you want--I'll give you an opportunity to look at the amended petition if you want to do that and, on the basis of that, you can testify. But you should not be testifying from notes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Do you want to do that? Do you want to do that? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I--fine. Yes. THE COURT: You can do that. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Again-- THE COURT: Just do that without questioning my ruling. All right. The court is giving you--the court officer is handing you the original amended petition. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Thank you. I would like to say something in defense of my character which has been dragged through the mud by the petitioner in the course of two years of relentless persecution in this court. THE COURT: No. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, you have the amended petition. It's there for a reason. It's to give you an opportunity to defend yourself on the allegations in that petition. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have never-- THE COURT: That's what this hearing is about. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. I have never harassed the petitioner, as we heard the petitioner herself state. The phone calls on record that were repeated took place during a period of time when Teddy, our young daughter, spent two weeks with me at my home in July and two weeks with me at my home in June, whereby I called the petitioner so that my daughter could speak with her so that she does not go into a sudden transition. I'm very careful about my daughter's feelings and very considerate of my daughter's feelings, and nobody is as considerate or at all considerate of my daughter's feelings like I am. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm objecting to that statement. THE COURT: Please. I'm going to sustain the objection. Please refer to the petition. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to state that this petitioner came to court and made a big to do and wasted a huge amount of this court's time-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Requesting E-mail. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This has to do with the petition. And the reason--what this court ruled was that I should be able to communicate by telephone. The Oregon court ruled that I should be able to communicate by telephone. This petitioner has demonstrated through the years an enormous aversion to communication about her daughter, and the reason for that-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Refer to the petition, once more. MR. COUTSOUKIS: And the purpose for the complaint--the reason for the complaint is so as to cause this court to order that no telephone communication take place and to also make it very difficult, although easy for the petitioner, very difficult for my daughter to enter-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: --visitation exchange. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. The petition states that the visitation exchange should be limited to five minutes, where that is hurtful to the feelings of my daughter. The petitioner give us an excuse, a number of reasons such as that the Ossining Police Station is unfriendly to children, yet where the exchange used to take place at my request was the Peekskill Police Station which has a separate waiting area where no policeman entered--they have a separate entrance in the back. And no prisoners enter, they have an entrance in the back. Additionally, in the waiting area they have the bathroom which is available twenty-four hours a day. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm going to object. My client's allegation-- THE COURT: I'm going to sustain-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Seven days a week. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. And if you continue in this manner, I will cut off your-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: --your direct examination. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She--she's testified-- THE COURT: I will not permit this to go on. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Can I--can I testify on the matters that she testified? THE COURT: Please. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. She testified that the Ossining Police Station is not a good place to exchange Teddy, and I'm stating that it was her choice to go to the Ossining Police Station. THE COURT: Okay. Move on. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The petitioner says that I harassed her by the fact that I have been blaming her for the condition of our daughter. The petitioner is responsible for the condition of our daughter-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: And that is a fact. And that I have tried to present the facts to the court many times in the past two years. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: All right. Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Stating the facts is not harassment. The petition says, Examine our daughter's body for bruises while on the street when, in fact, the last time we were here the petitioner testified that I only looked at her legs when on her birthday, I lifted her long skirt up to her knee to see her bruises. My statement about this is also that that does not constitute harassment and that the petitioner has subjected to our--my daughter to such brutal, badly-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: --treatment. Barbaric-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Violations. THE COURT: All right. I'm going to sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The reason for the statement in the petition is because the petitioner is covering up her crimes against my daughter and myself. The judge said the petitioner filed the petition with originally--ignored any references to faxes and the way I smell and all these other things. MR. DOMICELLO: I'm going to object, Your Honor, to anything that Judge Tolbert did. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I believe it is a father's right and a duty to have a child try to tell the parent when something bad is done to her. But the petitioner has placed our daughter in situations of risk and danger and for a child who cannot go on the toilet--to the toilet without assistance and cannot tell anyone what was done to her-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: My daughter is not in a position to tell people what is done to her because she has been silenced. She has a speech disability, and that speech disability is what the petitioner wants to conceal her past crimes. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. And if you continue along this line, I am going to-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: --cease your being a witness in this court. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm stating that-- THE COURT: Do you understand-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, ma'am. THE COURT: --what I'm saying? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, Your Honor, I understand. THE COURT: Well, then, please obey the ruling of the court. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Regarding-- THE COURT: And there are consequences to not doing that. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, Your Honor. Regarding the petitioner's contention that I am being harassing by asking my daughter whether she's beat, I want to reply that it is a parent's right and a duty to make sure a child can report any violence committed on her. I would like to say that the petitioner has taken extra judicial action to see to it that communication is limited and that the visitation exchange is also limited. And that the police, when she asked them to tell me and my daughter who play at the station every time we're there until she's ready to leave, told her to just take a walk, I would like to state that-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well-- THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The petitioner-- THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. On another matter, the petitioner has testified that she has a tape recorder that she brought to the police station. The petitioner has a speaker phone and she has telephone records. Also, I would like to show you a photo that shows what the police station looks like and to demonstrate that this policemen have not only windows to look outside where we are, they also have windows inside to look where we sit, they can hear us, they have cameras from which they can view us. And in spite of that, she is wired as Linda Tripp. She brought no tapes. She brought no transcripts. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: She has the ability--she had every ability to bring evidence of any phone conversations. She has a tape recorder. She has brought no tapes except what she saw on the record. She brought no transcripts. She brought nothing on the content of the conversations except pure speculation. May I show the photo, please? THE COURT: What do you want to show the court? COURT OFFICER: Sir? Answer the question. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm sorry, Did you--I didn't hear you. COURT OFFICER: What is it that you're seeking the court to look at? MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is the photo of the police station in Ossining where the visitation exchange takes place. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. THE COURT: It's not relevant to this proceeding. The court will not view that photograph. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Well, let me then mention that that police station is--the reason I chose a police station, it was the Peekskill station which is child friendly, was for the purposes of avoiding false accusations by the petitioner. The petitioner cannot make false accusations in the presence of police officers. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor, to the characterization-- THE COURT: Sustained. MR. DOMICELLO: ---accusation by fault. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: What is the objection? THE COURT: I'm sorry, it's sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. I have made it a point to tape record any conversations with the petitioner and I would like to show the contents of those conversations which the petitioner said were harassing and which I'm saying I'm not. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: On what ground? MR. DOMICELLO: Mr. Coutsoukis--first of all, Mr. Coutsoukis has not asked that these be entered into evidence and he hasn't asked they be marked into evidence, the tape recordings. I'll make my objection as far as the tape recordings when that does come though, if it does come. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to introduce into evidence transcripts of my conversations with Susan which are taken from the tapes which are over there. MR. DOMICELLO: Transcripts? Absolutely not, Your Honor. I object. THE COURT: The court will sustain the objection as to transcripts. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Can I--can we play the tapes then? THE COURT: You have something to play the tape on? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I wasn't allowed to bring a tape recorder-- downstairs security. THE COURT: The court does not have a tape recorder. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Can I ask for a continuance so that I can bring a tape recorder to play the contents of the tape? MR. DOMICELLO: I'm going to object, Your Honor. Mr. Coutsoukis had every ample opportunity to present his evidence today. We're here in court and if he has--if he doesn't have the electronics or what have you to play his tapes--and I'm going to object to the tape being played anyway on evidential grounds, but-- THE COURT: Okay. MR. DOMICELLO: I so object on those grounds. It's just that--it seems like the opportunity-- MS. KOTLER: Your Honor, I think that if he had wanted to play the tapes, he should have made arrangements. He had plenty of notice, and he didn't. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I brought the tape recorder last time we were here. I was not allowed to bring it into the court. I was told-- THE COURT: I think it-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I was told by the security people downstairs that it will not be allowed, and they held it downstairs. THE COURT: All right. MR. COUTSOUKIS: And that's why I did not bring it. I was told they had their own tape recorder, the security people. THE COURT: The motion for a continuance is denied. The court will conclude this hearing today. And, even if it were here, there is an objection on evidentiary grounds and the court is going to-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: Sustain that objection. MR. COUTSOUKIS: All right. Then let's move on. I would like to point out that it is the burden of the accuser to prove my guilt. This accuser has a taper recorder. She has brought it to the police. She can record their conversations. She brought absolutely--not only no contents of any conversations, she only brought, "I don't remember," "I think so," "Generally speaking," some vague dates, and the dates that Mr. Domicello brought from this huge record of my telephone calls which were phone calls from my home to Susan, to the petitioner when our daughter was in my house on vacation and we tried to call her. Regarding the faxes, the fax that she brought in as evidence which apparently--on the basis of which she got a temporary Order of Protection which does not mention faxes-- MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I object to what was presented-- THE COURT: Sustained. Go ahead. What's the-- MR. DOMICELLO: I have not sent any faxes to the petitioner in many, many, many, many months because the petitioner said-- THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry. Just a minute. We're having a problem with the tape. COURT OFFICER: We're running out of tape. THE COURT: Do you want to stop it? THE COURT: All right. We're going to take a brief recess. COURT OFFICER: Step out, please. (Off the Record) * * * THE COURT: All right. Proceed. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The petitioner last time made-- Are we on record yet? THE COURT: Yes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Made a statement regarding what I said about her and the assistants, three adults holding down my daughter while the dentist was working, and I would like to show an exhibit about that, please. THE COURT: Well, you can respond to that. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Well, I would like to also bring--put this into the record. THE COURT: What is that? MR. COUTSOUKIS: It's a statement from the dentist which says that two of the dentist's assistants and Susan held Teddy while they were working on her. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I'm going to object. It's irrelevant. That's not part of the petitioner's petition, those allegations. There's no allegations in my client's petition that anybody held her down. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Her testimony was that I stated it and I would like to verify that it is a fact. THE COURT: Well, you can-- you can respond to it, but-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: That document will not be admitted. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is the evidence that it is true. THE COURT: That document will not be admitted into evidence. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is an official dentist's statement. THE COURT: It was not your document. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It is not my document. THE COURT: It is the wrong-- you are the wrong witness to have that-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I was not allowed to let the petitioner see it. THE COURT: You--that is a dentist's record. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Here is a fax from--that I received from the petitioner that I would like to introduce into evidence. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. It's irrelevant. THE COURT: It's irrelevant to this proceeding. MR. COUTSOUKIS: It states that I should call at eight. THE COURT: It's not in evidence and it's not relevant to this case. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. I would like to state for the record that I received faxes during that period in June and July from the petitioner asking me to call her house and to which I responded appropriately. THE COURT: Okay. Move on. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I would like to introduce into evidence a description of where the petitioner took our little girl to have a genital and anal examinations and photos-- MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Claiming harassment. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Another example of false accusations. THE COURT: The court will not proceed along those lines. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. Regarding the often repeated statements by the two court-appointed attorneys that I should be psychologically evaluated, the court should know that the petitioner made a similar request in Oregon, as a result of which the Oregon court ordered both parties and the child of the family evaluated by an expert. And during that evaluation the petitioner refused to allow examination of her recent psychiatric record and she-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. The outcome of the psychological evaluation was that I am an extraordinary father. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MS. COUTSOUKIS: There is no basis for unilateral--a singular parent being examined here when in fact I have repeatedly introduced documentation to the court showing that the petitioner has a psychological problem-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MR. COUTSOUKIS: That posed a danger to my child. And that I believe that the petitioner in this action, as well as numerous previous actions, is trying to avoid any communication between the parents. Now, the Oregon court-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. MS. KOTLER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. It is typical and it is the responsibility of the Family Court to see to it that issues between parents are resolved expediently-- MS. KOTLER: Objection. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. I would like to note that it is the petitioner's effort here to avoid communication--communication which is necessary for resolving issues between parents, and resolving issues between parents expediently is in the interest of a child. And that-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, is there anything else that you want to say-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: And I would like the record-- THE COURT: In defense of yourself-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. THE COURT: In reference to the amended petition? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. THE COURT: If not, I will bring this to a close right now. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, I--yes, I do. THE COURT: Well, then, limit your remarks to that, please. MR. COUTSOUKIS: So, to conclude that part, I would like to recommend that the court order that the two parties have supervised discussions with appropriate mediation--an appropriate mediator facilitator on a regular basis so they can discuss about the child other than (inaudible) for doing exchange. THE COURT: Please direct your remarks to what is in the amended petition. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. THE COURT: For the last time. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. She's talking about the police station. The police station-- THE COURT: No. You've already addressed your remarks to the police station. Is there anything else in the amended petition that you want to comment on? MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes, I'm looking for it, Your Honor. THE COURT: Well, then do that right now. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm looking for it. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, once again Mr. Coutsoukis is looking through notes. MR. COUTSOUKIS: No, I-- THE COURT: Well, I think he's looking through all his documents to find the amended petition. MR. DOMICELLO: Which is right there. THE COURT: All right. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: And that petition is not yours for your file, Mr. Coutsoukis. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: It must be returned today. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have a copy of it, thank you. THE COURT: You have a copy? MR. COUTSOUKIS: The purpose of this petition is to avoid communication-- THE COURT: No. You already--you already said it. Now, address yourself to anything else that you want to in the petition that you have not already testified to. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This petition paints me as some--as the kind of person that I'm not. And the kind of person that I am is somebody who has an extraordinary career based on the kind of job who's prime criteria is absolute trust in one's personal integrity. No one--no one ever, ever in my entire career, until Susan's divorce lawyer, ever questioned my personal integrity. And today we have a lawyer who has committed perjury and I have it on tape-- MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Okay. Mr. Coutsoukis, I'm not going to take any more testimony. I am through. Any cross-examination? MR. DOMICELLO: None, Your Honor. That's all. THE COURT: Any cross- examination? MS. KOTLER: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Coutsoukis. Please hand up the amended petition. All right. Mr. Coutsoukis, any other witnesses that you want to call? MR. COUTSOUKIS: I requested documents from the YWCA and it were--they were to be brought by the YWCA employees who I understand is not here today. I would like you to permit me to bring that with me-- THE COURT: Okay. That opportunity will be denied. Any witnesses that you want to call? All right. I'm going to take closing statements at this time. Mr. Domicello? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, my client has testified to every allegation in her petition. Mr. Coutsoukis has cross-examined her--had an opportunity to cross-examine my client and has not refuted any of these allegations. My client has spent a lot of time on the stand discussing the harassing phone calls, faxes, harassment of his daughter when--during the pick-up and delivery of the daughter for visitation. My client entered into evidence faxes with demeaning, threatening and insulting comments written in the margins by Mr. Coutsoukis, and none of those faxes have been refuted on cross-examination or during Mr. Coutsoukis' direct examination. You have in the record records of Bell Atlantic. They have been entered into evidence. I'm going to speak to some of them now. Yes, you may be sure that Theodora was with Mr. Coutsoukis during some of the times when all these phone calls were made-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: All but-- MR. DOMICELLO: During July, but the records go way beyond July. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Excuse me, Your Honor. He's testifying. He's testifying. THE COURT: No. COURT OFFICER: Sir? THE COURT: No, Mr. Coutsoukis, let him finish. MR. COUTSOUKIS: He's testifying. THE COURT: You'll have a-- you'll--Mr. Coutsoukis-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I wasn't (inaudible) anything. THE COURT: You'll--you will have a chance to make a closing statement as well. MR. DOMICELLO: Theodora was not in Mr. Coutsoukis' house on 7/20 when there were ten calls. He was--she was not at his house on-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: He's testifying, Your Honor. COURT OFFICER: Sir? MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, may I be allowed to finish my closing statement here? THE COURT: Please let him finish. MR. COUTSOUKIS: He's testifying. September he indicates that (inaudible) her testimony. THE COURT: Would you listen to me? You let him finish, now. MR. DOMICELLO: Those records are in--have been entered into evidence, Your Honor. On 7/27, Mr. Coutsoukis--Theodora was not at Mr. Coutsoukis' house when there were twelve calls made. The list goes on and on. I'll let the court review those records on their own. You've heard testimony, Your Honor, with regard to Mr. Coutsoukis talking to his daughter on the phone, his daughter stating simply the letter B, something she learned in school. Mr. Coutsoukis turned the letter B, a simply statement, the letter B, into a harassing, threatening, manipulating phrase of, Have you been beaten? which would--which would obviously annoy my client and hurt his own daughter who doesn't need to hear such things. With intent to annoy, belittle, harass my client, he, Mr. Coutsoukis, checks his child's body during pick-up and delivery, in public--either in the police station or outside the police station--for bruises and what have you. And then if he finds a bruise, whatever, on the child's body, belittles, intimidates and threatens my client. Mr. Coutsoukis has intended to annoy and alarm my client by repeatedly saying over and over that my client is responsible for what happened to--for the state that his daughter is in and that she has murdered her. And in this court he stated a number of times, Should she be allowed to get away with murder? He admitted he's saying--he said those things by implication. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I'm being misquoted, Your Honor. Please strike the statement. He's misquoting-- THE COURT: Let him talk. The record will speak for itself. All right. Anything else? MR. DOMICELLO: One moment, please, Your Honor. My (inaudible) infer from the testimony of my client, and actually from the testimony of Mr. Coutsoukis himself, that he has committed these acts which are the basis of-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I object to the misstatement. MR. DOMICELLO: The basis of my client's petition, and I'm requesting that an Order of Protection be issued in her favor. I'll defer to Ms. Kotler with regard to the request for the psychological evaluation. That is her petition--her motion. I will defer to her to speak on this. I will be joining in that application. I have nothing further, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Coutsoukis, your turn. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. First of all, again, I'm not the person that has been described here, mischaracterized. I am an honorable, model citizen and the kind of father that most children would wish for. I gave up a career, a brilliant career to watch my child at home and then was harassed, berated, thrown out by the petitioner to go to work even though she was already bringing 70,000 a year. MR. DOMICELLO: Objection, Your Honor. His closing statement is not part of the-- THE COURT: That's--there's no-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: And-- THE COURT: There's no testimony about this, Mr. Coutsoukis. I'm going to-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Then I-- THE COURT: I'm going to strike that. I'm going to strike-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: And please do not continually ignore my rulings. Do not make comments like that that are not in the record. Just don't do it. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I have won award accommodations from the department of--the police department in New York-- THE COURT: No, now you're doing it right now. MR. COUTSOUKIS: The Department of Commerce. THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, that is the end. Let me hear from the law guardian. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I-- THE COURT: No. No more. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Okay. THE COURT: No. You're ignoring my-- COURT OFFICER: Sir? THE COURT: My rulings. MS. KOTLER: Your Honor, I listened carefully to all the testimony that I believe-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I object to the law guardian. She has no basis for existence in this room. Their only purpose here is-- THE COURT: Mr. Coutsoukis, enough. Continue. MS. KOTLER: I believe that the petitioner has made a prima facie case. I am profoundly disturbed by some of the allegations that have been made and I have been disturbed to the point where I have filed a motion requesting a psychological evaluation and I renew my request for that evaluation now. I believe everyone has a copy of my motion. I'm not going to go through it paragraph by paragraph and waste the court's time, unless the court would like me to do that. THE COURT: No. MS. KOTLER: I think everyone has seen it. The court has heard the testimony and can certainly judge it for herself, but I am not a psychiatrist. No one here is a psychiatrist, and I am concerned that this child is going to suffer damage and may need supervised visitation. MR. COUTSOUKIS: I object. This child is under the petitioner's care almost all the time-- COURT OFFICER: Sir? MR. COUTSOUKIS: And she has almost died twice. THE COURT: No more, Mr. Coutsoukis. No more. And I am concluding these proceedings. Decision is reserved. You will get a copy of my decision in the mail, and you are to obey that decision. That concludes today's proceeding. COURT OFFICER: Please step out. Thank you. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, can I--may I request-- COURT OFFICER: Everybody step out. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, if I may? THE COURT: Wait outside for the extended temporary order. MR. DOMICELLO: Your Honor, I would just like to join in Ms. Kotler's application and request in addition that-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: Excuse me. He's out of order. THE COURT: Well, I'll make that determination. MR. DOMICELLO: And request that Mr. Coutsoukis be placed on the Supervision Department of Probation to-- MR. COUTSOUKIS: I object to that. Your Honor-- THE COURT: So noted. MR. COUTSOUKIS: This is called-- THE COURT: That's the end. COURT OFFICER: Step out, please. THE COURT: That's the end. MR. COUTSOUKIS: Persecution of fathers. THE COURT: That's the end. COURT OFFICER: Thank you, folks. Everyone step out, please. Have a nice evening. MS. KOTLER: Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. (End of Proceedings) * * * STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ROCKLAND) ss: I, Jeanette Carelli, certify that the foregoing transcript of the proceedings in the Family Court of Samora vs. Coutsoukis, Docket No. 0-972-98, was prepared to the best of my ability, using four-track electronic transcription equipment, and is a true and accurate record of the proceedings. ________________________ Jeanette Carelli Sandy Saunders Reporting 2 New Hempstead Road New City, New York 10956 Dated: April 13, 1999 1 IMPORT  - Proceedings - u@ 88u@ 8::b{HH8 ::b{HH8 ::b{HH ½| & & & & &&I & & & & & & & && & & & &*:IXnp -/H]_az|!=`z| ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#,$ ` p#,$7 $& ' ( ) 0po)\W¨wwwww]C ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#$ ` p#"$7 ` p# $& ' ( ) W 9 N >}δgM嚚3 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# =sNk*˱}cLLL}L2 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p#  !9!Y!z!K"t""#%)&&')δΚfL2  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#)S**I, .).@.w.//"0t03|4˱fL2 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# |44j5D6~67+7h77777Q8f888S9˱嗀倀iR; ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#S99::<:Y:::;;;;<8<T<<<=/=>=?˴˴˚i˴O5 ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#=?r????2@S@@@@AkAAAPBaBBCCCDCDDDEEηηΠηΠΆlΆR ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#EFkFFFFG,GG7HlHH%IJIrIIII)JWJsJJJK˴˴i崴˴P ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#KjLLLLPMM/NNNNOOOOOiPP˴i˴˃R; ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#P)QRWRrR0SPSSSSS TMTTTT"U[UaVVVWWkX˱嚱f˱L ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#kXXX Y7YcYYYYZZD[[\\˴冴mS9 ` p# ` p#0 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#\]3]r]]]]^ ^T^v^__=```aaa9bbccδδδΚiiRR ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#cc2dNd|dddete}effiggg*hGhhhhigii˴˚˃lR˚˴l ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#isjjkkkkkk(lslllllRmm@nSn_nnnnooѺѺ躺oU ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#oo pppppqq5qAqqr0rrrrCsysstHttttuCujuu v9vavvvη跠蠆oΆ ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#!v wpww4x>x|xxxxyyyyRzozzzzz`{{崝oX> ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#{{{*}P}l}}>~j~~,Xt'So 'Gb˱˚l嚃˚Ul ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p#<WR}.VԆ4އδΚfO5 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#>]y :hr*pu˴˃˝lR;  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#|Ə+?cʒÓߓѺu[[[AA ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#j&So:Unǘ,3˴˴l˴S ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#3ęۚ$H؛!|δΆδδlδU ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#h5eӟ/ԠLȡNԢݢ+δ΀΀fL ` p# ` p# ` p#p ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#c ;x KĦ6^ب-i©I˴˚fO8 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#Ix)]ܫ'CtҬӭU~^8Nuı崝坆ooooooU ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#ı6}۲Snr{ն4P}շ˱嚃˚iO˚˱ ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#RԸ (YӼ_"˱fL˱L5 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#"iȾ8WyP|@fΝ川lR ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#fMa˴˚ˀfLL30 ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# Nj6b~5P1Saz蠷膷oX ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# 8Sj1c3">ηηΆoXA ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#k&B^=Nn| &*VrδΝΝΆΆΆoΝX ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#7 O}/u:Wr蝷ѷjѷѷS ` p# ` p#0 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# [w\$YC^1ηΠΉΠoUΠΠΉΉ ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p##I6?x:V~#>YEΠηηΠoU ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#E~5P +GfrR~˴崆ooooU ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#!9 y2^zѺщѺrщX ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#KU@qsc跷膷oX膆 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#mvr &So ;TηΠηΉΠoUηη ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#T?Z| >ZS   9 u @ l    ηΝlU> ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  7 R   " D   eR;iiiR ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#}9r1]yDd9Dv)YηηηΆΆηllΆl ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#s(L`4>^˱h˂QQQ7  ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#Y   !1!!"x"""#$/$˱˚iiO6 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#/$T$m$$$$$$&%T%p%&&d''''(5((δ蚀fO8 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#((5))))-*T****V++++-]----.n...././W///Q0002˱屚屚˱山嚱f  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#!2L33~44@56J7q77L8888889V999:˱}cccLLLcc ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#:::::;H;;;;<<K=m====T>>˴˚lU˚< ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#>> ?\?u?'@@@@@@LAAA˴oV< ` p#0 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# A/BTB}BBC2CCCC3D[DDDDE\EEEEIFpFFFѺѣщooUoUUUUo ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#FFG)GaGGGGHHHWIIIJ@J~OOoQQQ倴fL  ` p## ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#QHRRTTT!U+VVVVEWrWWXgXY^YYY嚀ffL ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p#YRZtZZZ3[O[[7\\\ ]]]]'^O^^^_>__`-`c````gRgkgg4hhh&i^i*jGjjjjjkhl˴崚˴˚倴崴fL ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#hl}llOmummpPppAqmqqq4s`ssttu+uKuδδfL ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#Kuguw=xexxxyFysyyy zzz{{j|||δ蚚fL ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#|~~~:{4т:V˱ˀf˚L˱˱ ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p#&\qyވ!=͋YE˴˚˴崚˴gM ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#T*Fsْ˱嚀fL2 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p#ߔ(h2 n*FÚӛ˱ffffL ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#ӛ5jBrܠ#I˱˱ˀgOO5 ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#%£<Xɥ Kv4f'\ک˴ffˀ ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#CFr*Gc@lUٰZvӲ崚崴崴gM ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p#ӲNdzZĴGbj2N=˚˴ˀ˴崴f ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#=5* ,aV 3˱}f}}Lfff ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p#3l#K~D%Y˱˚fL2  ` p#  ` p# ` p## ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# &x,^3MiCxSh˴˴崴˴fL ` p#  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#1No-N|3IδgδδδO ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#IVXZ\^`bdfhjlnprtvxz+Ece}зНзИ}$7p $& ' ( )  ` p# ` p# ` p# ` p#( ` p#00#)W)|4S9=?EKPkX\ciov{3Iı"fET /$(2:>AFQY8dhlKu|ӛӲ=3I      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:7CG Times (WN)serifUnivers (WN) Courier 7$7$