1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF JACKSON 3 4 In the Matter of the Marriage of: ) ) 5 SUSAN SAMORA COUTSOUKIS, ) ) 6 Petitioner, ) ) 7 and ) Case No. 94-3846-D-3 ) 8 PHOTIUS COUTSOUKIS, ) ) 9 Respondent. ) __________________________________) 10 11 12 13 14 PERPETUATION TESTIMONY OF 15 BARBARA LYNN KOZOL 16 17 BE IT REMEMBERED That the perpetuation testimony 18 of BARBARA LYNN KOZOL was taken as a witness on behalf of 19 the Petitioner before Debra J. Dugan, a Certified Shorthand 20 Reporter for Oregon, on September 4, 1997, beginning at the 21 hour of 1:30 p.m. at the office of Cristina Sanz, 2 North 22 Oakdale, Medford, Oregon. 23 24 25 2 1 A P P E A R A N C E S 2 3 FOR THE PETITIONER: CRISTINA SANZ Attorney at Law 4 2 North Oakdale Medford, OR 97501 5 6 7 FOR THE RESPONDENT: CHARTER & LORI Attorneys at Law 8 BY: BETH LORI, ESQ. 220 North Oakdale 9 Medford, OR 97501 10 11 12 13 14 15 C O N T E N T S 16 Examination by: Page: 17 MS. SANZ 5, 110 18 MS. LORI 61, 117 19 20 21 EXHIBIT INDEX 22 Exhibit No. Page: 23 1 - Letter from Mr. Coutsoukis to Ms. Kozol 40 24 25 3 1 S T I P U L A T I O N 2 At said time and place the following stipulation was 3 entered into between the attorneys present in behalf of the 4 respective parties: 5 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that all irregularities as to 6 notice of time and place and manner of taking said 7 perpetuation testimony are hereby waived. Parties have 8 stipulated to perpetuate testimony pursuant to ORCP Rule 9 39(i), and waive notice and objections to notice. 10 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that pursuant to Rule 11 39(i)(6), the perpetuation examination shall proceed as set 12 forth in subsection D. All objections to any testimony or 13 evidence shall be made at the time of the deposition and 14 any objections not made at the deposition shall be deemed 15 waived. 16 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that the reading and signing 17 of said perpetuation testimony by the party and the filing 18 thereof are hereby expressly waived. 19 ---oOo--- 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 1 BARBARA LYNN KOZOL 2 was thereupon called as a witness on behalf of the 3 Petitioner and, after having been first duly sworn, was 4 examined and testified as follows: 5 6 MS. LORI: Before we proceed, what I want to 7 do is a motion in limine, which is just to limit 8 testimony about opinions to what the witnesses have 9 personally observed in accordance with Rule 602 and 10 Rule 701. 11 MS. SANZ: Well, I'm going to, you know, I 12 don't know if you want the judge to hear this right 13 off, but part of Ms. Kozol's responsibilities are 14 overseeing, you know, medical records, information 15 from staff; and she can form her opinions from all 16 that information, not just from her own observations 17 themselves. 18 MS. LORI: What I suggest we do is do an 19 offer of proof; in other words, I state my objection, 20 you make an offer of proof, and then it's preserved in 21 the record and the judge can make a decision from 22 there. 23 MS. SANZ: All right. 24 25 5 1 DIRECT EXAMINATION 2 BY MS. SANZ: 3 Q Okay. Ms. Kozol, please state your name, spell 4 your last name for the record? 5 A It's Barbara Lynn Kozol, K-o-z-o-l. 6 Q And you are a resident of Jackson County? 7 A Yes, I am. 8 Q And for how long? 9 A Since 1970. 10 Q Okay. You are currently employed? 11 A Yes, I am. 12 Q And if you could state where you're employed and 13 what you do? 14 A I'm the director of child development at Rogue 15 Valley Medical Center, Asante. 16 Q Okay. What are your responsibilities? 17 A Uhm, I direct several different programs that 18 serve children, usually either delayed, disabled, or high 19 risk children. 20 Q And how many staff members do you supervise? 21 A Uhm, just under 100; possibly the hundredth got 22 hired today. 23 Q And you are part of Rogue Valley Medical Center? 24 A Part of Rogue Valley Medical Center, correct. We 25 provide a blended medical educational program. 6 1 Q What does that mean? 2 A We do get educational dollars to provide 3 preschool type services, teachers, uhm, home family 4 consultant people for identified handicapped children. And 5 we also have physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech 6 therapy, the more traditional medical services one thinks 7 of for small children. 8 Q You just gave a summary of the kinds of services 9 you provide in your center? 10 A That's most of them. 11 Q Most of them. Anything else? 12 A We have behavioral consultation for emotionally 13 challenged children. I also have, we have a developmental 14 assessment clinic for infants and preschoolers. I also 15 have an employee child care for children of employees in 16 the hospital, so -- 17 Q And you have been director of that program for 18 how long? 19 A The child -- there's more than one program in 20 that. I've been director of all those children's programs 21 since '82; some of them didn't start until a little bit 22 after that, but -- 23 Q Is that the first time you got involved with the 24 Childrens' Development Center? 25 A Yeah, I created it; that makes it simple. 7 1 Q And you're physically located right now at Rogue 2 Valley Medical Center? 3 A Actually, no. 4 Q You have different satellites? 5 A We have six different satellites, but we're at, 6 this week, have moved our facilities in the hospital to 945 7 South Riverside. 8 Q You receive -- how do you receive referrals, you 9 know, your patients? I don't know if you consider them 10 patients or clients? 11 A Patients, usually, kids. Uhm, from a variety of 12 sources; most of them come from doctors, SCF -- Services 13 for Children and Families. 14 Q Who used to be called? 15 A CSD. 16 Q Children Services Division? 17 A Children Services Division, right. 18 Q Okay. 19 A Sometimes school districts; occasionally self 20 referrals, which we screen to make sure they're 21 appropriate. That's the great majority. 22 Q And your evaluation and services to the children, 23 is that, you know, purely becomes an internal matter, or is 24 that shared with other, you know, does it go automatically 25 shared to the primary physician, or -- 8 1 A We, yeah, we just, as a matter of philosophy, 2 always look at the physician as a primary case manager. So 3 anything we do with children, the reports go to the 4 doctors, of what we're doing; and then we may consult with 5 them beforehand, particularly if it's an involved case. 6 Usually the typical child, the doctor will call and refer, 7 they'll tell us about them, we'll do an eval on the child, 8 we'll talk to the physician about what we'd like to do or 9 what we plan on doing, and then we send them reports on a 10 regular basis afterwards. 11 Q Okay. So doctors or the medical staff, 12 specifically doctors are very involved with your planning 13 and evaluation of how things are going? 14 A Uh-huh. If -- 15 Q Is that a yes? 16 A That's a yes, I'm sorry. You can't put a nod on. 17 Yes. Depending on the physician, a lot of times they're 18 involved just by us giving them reports, and if it's a 19 physician that tends to be someone that really wants to get 20 in there and work, then we have more actual planning with 21 them. 22 Q Okay. Can you tell us a little bit about your 23 educational background? 24 A I have a Bachelor's degree in occupational 25 therapy and a Master's degree in psychology. 9 1 Q And do you hold any licenses or -- 2 A Just the national and state license for 3 occupational therapy. 4 Q You have other experience other than your 5 involvement with CDC? 6 A Right, when I first started as a therapist, I 7 worked in Florida with, in child psychiatry. And then when 8 I first moved here in the valley, I was what we refer to as 9 a general practitioner, occupational therapist doing quite 10 a lot of different types of therapy. And then I worked on 11 the psychiatric unit, commonly called Two North, for eight 12 years. Uhm, I had some psychiatric experience also in 13 North Carolina as an intern in a state hospital. 14 Q How many years? 15 A Uhm, that was quite a while ago; that would have 16 been a long time ago, '68, '69. 17 Q For two years? Or how many years did you hold 18 that position? 19 A That was just as an intern, that was just four 20 months. 21 Q When you said you worked in child psychiatry, how 22 many years? 23 A That was a year and a half. 24 Q Year and a half. And as a general practitioner 25 as a therapist, how many years? 10 1 A I moved here in '70 and we opened the psychiatric 2 unit in spring of '72, so I would say two years. And then 3 when we opened the psychiatric unit, I was 90 percent adult 4 psychiatry and ten percent on the side working with 5 children. I've never totally given children up at any 6 particular time. 7 Q Now, how was Teddy Coutsoukis, who is the child 8 of the parties, how was she referred to your center? 9 A Dr. Williams referred her to us. 10 Q And is that Dr. Diane Williams? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Is that the child's pediatrician? 13 A Yes, or was at that time. 14 Q And what were the concerns? 15 A That Teddy had some pretty significant 16 developmental delay, and apraxia, which is trouble moving 17 her body. Uhm, and Diane wanted her enrolled in our 18 handicapped program for children. 19 Q And what service -- so when did you first 20 evaluate Teddy? 21 A I, uhm, I didn't look at my dates for review 22 before I first came. I remember meeting with the parents, 23 it was in summer, so it must have been summer of '95. 24 Q Okay. 25 A And I'm not absolutely positive of that. 11 1 Q And what was the first, what did you have as your 2 initial plan and goal for treatment for Teddy? 3 A We wanted, that, let's see, Teddy was not quite a 4 year old then. The primary goal was to do a thorough 5 ongoing evaluation, because she is a fairly complicated 6 child in her disabilities; and to immediately get some 7 physical therapy started, uhm, because movement was a big 8 issue; and then provide family consultation, which is 9 someone working with the parents and giving them ideas of 10 what they can do at home to help the child function better. 11 Q At the time you first met Teddy and her parents, 12 were Mr. and Mrs. Coutsoukis already separated? 13 A No. They had, uhm, the first meeting we had, 14 they declared that they, you know, were having some 15 troubles. But to my memory, they were together. 16 Q Okay. Anything remarkable that you remember from 17 that first meeting with the parents? 18 A Photius was overbearing at that point, but also 19 obviously concerned. I mean, both parents were obviously 20 concerned about the child and both parents were distressed. 21 Q They had just learned, or they were dealing 22 initially with some of these issues? 23 A Yeah, I think they appeared to be pretty stricken 24 by the whole, just beginning to accept the severity of 25 Teddy's problems. It's real typical of parents, initially 12 1 to go okay, she's not all right, how fast will she be okay. 2 And I think they were just beginning to really grasp that 3 it wasn't something that was just going to get better 4 overnight. 5 Q Okay. And what type of services, if you can go 6 over the progression of services that you provided for 7 Teddy? 8 A We started with the family consultation and 9 physical therapy. As she got a little bigger, we have a 10 parent toddler group that the parent and the child come in 11 a small group with. So it's a beginning social experience 12 for the child, and it's also an opportunity for parents to 13 get ideas from other parents and sort of support each 14 other. And then we have physical, occupational, and speech 15 therapy available in that group. 16 Photius was originally coming because he had more 17 time with the child, but he wasn't appropriate and we had 18 to ask him to quit coming. We then provided just 19 outpatient therapy, speech, occupational, physical therapy; 20 for a while we had difficulty, uhm, with that and with 21 Photius. And then we finally got her going in preschool, 22 or we -- she, we offered her what's called the toddler 23 school, and Photius didn't want her in it for the first 24 year; but she did participate in that this last year. 25 Q What would you say her prognosis is now? 13 1 MS. LORI: Well, I'm going to object on the 2 basis of, I guess lack of medical expertise. 3 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 4 Q What was her last evaluation. What, had things 5 progressed, or what is her current situation since when you 6 last saw her? 7 A Well, of course, we haven't seen her now since 8 April or so. 9 Q April of this year? 10 A Right. I did, uhm, a cognitive evaluation of her 11 in the fall in getting ready for her annual yearly meeting. 12 And she has, uhm, really varied abilities, even in her 13 thinking skills, they're extremely varied. She is not an 14 average retarded child. I mean, typically kids that are 15 fairly clear cut retarded are kind of the same, their gross 16 motor levels and their thinking levels and their fine motor 17 levels are all roughly the same. And she's not like that 18 at all. Uhm, even in the sub components of her thinking 19 skills, they're very varied. So I think anybody, no matter 20 how much medical expertise they had, or time they had with 21 her right now could not give you a positive black and white 22 answer. I think she has a lot of potential, but she has 23 significant disabilities. 24 Q And what are those disabilities? 25 A Well, her biggest problem right now is she has a 14 1 significant language disability; and some of her ability to 2 think in that language process is affected. It's not just 3 her ability to talk, it's her, apparently her ability to 4 think language. She has excellent rote skills, she has 5 excellent perceptual matching skills, but -- and her 6 quality of movement in walking and her language, both 7 abstract thinking language and spoken language, are 8 significantly delayed, and are probably going to be that 9 way for some time. She is, even if, quote unquote, the 10 light bulb comes on in her cognitive language skills, she 11 will always have motor problems. 12 Q Let's take her language skills, I'm not sure, is 13 she -- is there an inability to speak clearly, or to 14 understand language? 15 A Both. 16 Q Both? 17 A Both. She has a very limited vocabulary. She 18 has signs, as well, a signing vocabulary as well as the 19 spoken vocabulary. Her spoken -- I don't know what her 20 spoken vocabulary is now, but it was limited to a few 21 single words before that she couldn't consistently always 22 use in a multitude of settings. Uhm, I don't know what to 23 say past that. 24 Q How about in her quality of motor skills? 25 A The motor skill apraxia, she has like a tremor, 15 1 jerkiness to her movement; you know, she's walking, uhm, 2 she falls a lot. And that will improve, I mean, she'll get 3 where she can move faster and get in and out of sitting and 4 walking with more smoothness; but she is always going to 5 have that kind of a jerkiness in her movement. 6 Q And you have shared this information with, I 7 assume, Dr. Williams, correct? 8 A Uh-huh, oh, yes. 9 Q Have there been other medical or social experts 10 or institutions that have asked you for similar, or this 11 type of information? 12 A There's a facility in New York I have a request 13 from, that I don't believe we've sent them that information 14 yet. They want records to establish services for her 15 there. 16 Q Okay. Now, in your dealings with Teddy, you, of 17 course, have had interaction with both parents? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Have you had, yourself, had a lot of direct 20 interaction with Mr. Coutsoukis? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Has he ever made comments to you concerning his 23 opinions of women that you would consider sexist? 24 MS. LORI: Objection as to relevancy; it's 25 more prejudicial than probative. Then if you want, we 16 1 can discuss with the judge whether or not it comes in 2 or stays out. 3 MS. SANZ: Okay. Do you want to call the 4 judge now, or do you want to do it at the time of 5 hearing? 6 MS. LORI: Let's do it at the time of 7 hearing, because I think we'll be calling the judge a 8 lot otherwise. 9 MS. SANZ: Right. 10 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 11 Q Go ahead and answer the question. 12 A Okay. Yes, most definitely. 13 Q And what are those comments? 14 A That not just women in general, but particularly 15 American women, uhm, you know, that we're, we don't raise 16 our children right, that we don't care about the children, 17 that we're more interested in, you know, money or success 18 or whatever, than the children. 19 Q Does he use any kind of descriptive words or, you 20 know, certain language to describe -- 21 MS. LORI: And again, I'm going to object on 22 relevancy. It's going to be ongoing in this 23 situation. 24 THE WITNESS: Uhm, he, it's, it's cultural, 25 probably, that he uses different words than one 17 1 normally expects. You know, he has had several 2 instances of when he has been angry at me and talking 3 about spewing children out of my vagina to fail an 4 American society. So it's not your traditional sexist 5 comments; it's, uhm, I don't particularly appreciate 6 having him discuss my vagina with the switchboard 7 operator at work, etcetera. 8 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 9 Q He also makes general comments? 10 A Uh-huh. 11 Q Not always those specifically concerning you, but 12 general negative comments about American women? 13 A Right, American women, right. That's the reason 14 he was asked not to come to the little parent toddler group 15 because we have, of course, most of the parents that come 16 with their toddlers are female; so they ended up in a 17 situation where you would have Photius and five mothers and 18 two or three female staff and all the children, you know, 19 seven or eight children; and then he would proceed with 20 what was wrong with American women and how they couldn't 21 raise children right, and how the children were all turning 22 out bad because of their inadequacies, etcetera. And of 23 course there's all these poor mothers that were distressed. 24 And we had asked him to refrain from that several times, 25 and he didn't, so we just said, you're not welcome anymore, 18 1 I'm sorry. 2 Q How is this relevant in terms of Teddy? 3 A Teddy is female, uhm, and he, he has, he does not 4 respect -- and Teddy's American, too. I have never seen 5 him really respect American women; he's always very 6 belittling to us. And this is a female child who, in her, 7 is going to grow up to be an American woman, and who is 8 surely going to hear, and has already heard over and over 9 and over and over again how worthless American women are. 10 So for her self-esteem, it's going to be pretty 11 devastating. 12 Q How would you say this affects your staff? 13 A Most of my staff were afraid of him. I mean, a 14 lot of my meetings with, ongoing meetings with the staff 15 regarding how we were handling him were people not wanting 16 to treat Teddy because they were afraid of him, uhm, or 17 they were burned out, they were just emotionally battered 18 by him and asking to be removed from Teddy's care and 19 somebody else taking it, and for me trying to find, one, 20 people that were willing to work, and two, some security 21 measures to give them some sense of confidence. 22 Q How would you say this would affect 23 Mrs. Coutsoukis? 24 A What is this? 25 Q The -- 19 1 A The sexist? 2 Q Yes. 3 MS. LORI: Objection as to speculation, 4 unless she has personal knowledge of this. 5 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 6 Q Do you have any -- has he made those types of 7 comments -- well, do you have any basis to have an opinion 8 as to how this affects Mrs. Coutsoukis, do you know? 9 A Mrs. Coutsoukis has not had specific 10 conversations with me on her self-esteem. She has talked 11 about, you know, being afraid that she didn't want him to 12 find out, you know, she was doing this with the child or -- 13 Q But specifically about -- 14 A As far as treatment? 15 Q How about specifically about his attitudes or his 16 berating of women? 17 A I'm still not exactly -- 18 Q Does that, do you think, affect Mrs. Coutsoukis? 19 A Oh, I'm sure. 20 MS. LORI: Again, objection as to 21 speculation. 22 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 23 Q Do you have reason to know as to whether she is 24 affected by these types of comments? 25 A She has, she has personally told me that, you 20 1 know, one, I've seen her cry; uhm, two, she has talked to 2 me about being afraid of him, yes. The specific concrete 3 things like that, yes, she has done. As far as how she 4 feels inside at any depth, she has not. 5 Q Has Mr. Coutsoukis ever insinuated or actually 6 stated directly that he feels Teddy's medical situation is 7 due to the separation he had with Mrs. Coutsoukis? 8 A Very clearly and in print, several different 9 occasions, you know, he has said it's because she was in 10 child care. And that's part of the reason that he is so 11 against American women: They put their children in child 12 care. And if he, if Teddy hadn't been abandoned in this 13 child care situation, then yes, this would be a different 14 situation. 15 Q In your experience and in your training, is it 16 ever possible that separation from a parent can cause the 17 kind of medical situation that Teddy has? 18 A Not -- I have seen children with significant 19 problems from being separated from their parents; but 20 they're very, very different from Teddy. Teddy is 21 physically different; I mean, if you particularly look at 22 some pictures when she was a year old, she has a kind of a, 23 it was more obvious when she was younger, kind of a 24 square-ish little pixie head that really isn't like either 25 one of her parents. Uhm, she has actual structural, 21 1 physical structural differences that are more like 2 prenatal, fetal affect of some sort, or an unknown or 3 unrecognized syndrome; it's not anything that neglect or 4 emotional trauma could have caused. And dyspraxia, or 5 apraxia, like we're talking about, the motor coordination 6 problems are not something that emotional trauma would have 7 caused, could have caused in any way, shape, or form. 8 Q So her actual physical medical situation could 9 not have been caused by any separation that she had? 10 A Absolutely. 11 MS. LORI: Well, I'm going to object as to 12 misstatement. I think she's indicating that at least 13 the physical condition was not caused by emotional 14 trauma. 15 MS. SANZ: Right. And that's what I want to 16 make, that was my point. 17 MS. LORI: That's fine. 18 THE WITNESS: Right, the physical looks were 19 not caused. The motor movement could not possibly 20 have been caused. Uhm, her learnings, you know, if 21 you take a child and they have the perfect well-bonded 22 family and you removed that child from the parent, 23 what you're going to get is a child who's depressed, a 24 child who quits eating may lose weight, may have a 25 lack of affect, may do some odd stereotypies, you 22 1 know, banging their head against the wall, that kind 2 of thing. 3 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 4 Q Basically behavioral issues? 5 A Behavioral issues. And, you know, may get skinny 6 because they're not eating, they're depressed; a lot like 7 an adult in that situation. You don't get abnormal 8 language development, uhm, abnormal ability to talk, 9 abnormal motor planning, all of those things that are her 10 primary big problems. Those don't come as a result of an 11 emotional problem, it's a physical. 12 Q But is it -- 13 A As in neurological physical. 14 Q But was it your understanding that Mr. Coutsoukis 15 blames the separation and/or day care -- 16 A Uh-huh. 17 Q On, uhm, and the reason for that, on -- that that 18 had caused Teddy's physical situation? 19 A Uh-huh. 20 Q You're saying yes? 21 A I'm saying yes. I need to be clearer, sorry. 22 Q Now, you offered physical therapy to Teddy. And 23 what were the goals you had for that? 24 A Initially that she could move about in 25 preparation for walking; she was hypertonic, which is also 23 1 a physical, neurophysical condition that -- and she still 2 is hypertonic, that could not have been caused emotionally. 3 Hypertonic means your muscles are kind of loose as a goose, 4 real, real flexible. And she has always been significantly 5 hypertonic; it goes with apraxia a lot. It means that she 6 can't tighten her muscle up well enough to support a joint. 7 And when we first saw her, the hypertonia was 8 really interfering with her ability to sit; you know, she 9 would kind of be in a collapsed position, she didn't have 10 enough muscle tone in her trunk to establish sitting. So 11 we wanted to get good trunk tone established as sort of a 12 prewalking on a strength building type of thing, with the 13 eventual goal, of course, that she would walk. 14 Q Did you come across any problems in providing 15 these services to Teddy? 16 A Quite a few. The first obstacle was that Photius 17 didn't want us to touch the child. And it's really, really 18 hard to treat a child if you can't touch them. And the, 19 uhm, the initial therapist tried to accommodate that and 20 show, well, okay, this is how, okay, you hold the child, 21 this is how I want you to hold the child, this is how I 22 want you to tip the child. We finally, we had to break 23 down and put our hands on her because we just can't work, 24 it's like asking a physician to treat you but not touch 25 you. Then he didn't, he was -- 24 1 Q This initial therapist was who? 2 A I'm trying to think who was, if there was one 3 before David. 4 Q Shirley Steinson? 5 A Shirley Steinson is not a therapist. Uhm, I'm 6 blocking on who we had before David. We had a female, we 7 went to David Miller as a PT because we thought maybe 8 Photius would be more comfortable with David. 9 Q If you don't remember, that's okay. 10 A And we've been through several for the reasons 11 that I had mentioned earlier. We also wanted to put her on 12 a variety of therapy equipment. It, at that time, and 13 still does upset Photius that we wanted to use therapy 14 balls. There's a very, very good therapeutic reason for 15 needing the therapy balls, and that has always been a bone 16 of contention. 17 Q What is a therapy ball? 18 A A therapy ball is a large rubber ball. Most of 19 them are probably -- they come in different sizes, but the 20 one you see most typically is about, oh, 30 inches across. 21 And what you do is you set the child on top of the ball 22 with your hands like at her waist supporting her, and you 23 tend to tip the child one way or the other; and what you're 24 doing is like if I take you and tip you over, your body is 25 going to readjust in space to try to stay straight, to try 25 1 to stay up. And that's an automatic reflex type of thing. 2 And the therapist uses that, uhm, that built-in programed 3 desire to try to stay upright, to build the muscles and to 4 build the tone and to build the body's ability to respond 5 to gravitational cues, if that makes sense. 6 Q And Mr. Coutsoukis requested that there not be 7 the use of these balls? 8 A He absolutely did not want the balls. 9 Q Any particular reason? 10 A Because he -- you would have to ask, you know, it 11 was, when we would try to explain why they were good, you 12 know, it was always that he knew best and that's not what 13 he wanted. I can't tell you exactly why because it would 14 sort of get lost in the dialog. 15 Q All right. You kind of made a remark that you 16 had several staff members work with Mr. Coutsoukis, I take 17 it in the beginning it was Mr. Coutsoukis and Teddy, just 18 the two of them who were handling, who were involved in the 19 physical therapy? 20 A Or it could have been -- it would be Mr. 21 Coutsoukis and Teddy, but it could be, uhm, Susan Samora 22 and Teddy; but Susan would not allow the child on the balls 23 either because Photius had forbid her to. So she was 24 trying to respect his wishes at that point, too. So even 25 when Photius wasn't around, we couldn't put her on the ball 26 1 because that was what he had said. 2 Q In dealing, again, in physical therapy when I 3 asked you initially whether you had problems specifically 4 in your dealings with Mr. Coutsoukis? 5 A Oh, yeah; and then Susan following his 6 instructions. 7 Q You had mentioned several staff members worked 8 with Mr. Coutsoukis? 9 A At some, one point, all of our physical 10 therapists did. Uhm, and -- 11 Q And why was that? 12 A Because it was so emotionally draining to work 13 with him, it would really burn them out. And with the 14 females, we really did try to accommodate them. And 15 because Susan worked all day, and I don't remember what 16 Photius' schedule and things were, we would end up making 17 physical therapy or speech therapy appointments at 5:00 or 18 5:30 so that we would end up in situations where there was 19 nobody else around, uhm, except him and/or Susan if it was 20 Susan, and Teddy and the therapist. 21 And to be berated by him regularly, and/or just 22 to try to get, to say therapy is over now, the half hour is 23 up and for him to keep talking and not drop situations, and 24 you're in a place by yourself with the man, it was very 25 uncomfortable. 27 1 Q About how many staff members ended up working 2 with Mr. Coutsoukis? 3 A Well, we had, let's see, we've had the therapist 4 before David. We've had four PT's I can think of -- I 5 should have probably written all these down -- at least two 6 or three OT's and two or three speech therapists. 7 Q Okay. Did he ever threaten any of your staff? 8 MS. LORI: Objection as to personal 9 knowledge. 10 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 11 Q Do you know whether Mr. Coutsoukis ever 12 threatened a staff member of yours, was that ever raised, 13 brought to your attention? 14 A The only time he physically threatened one was 15 David. That is one thing I will say, you know, he never 16 threatened one of the, physically threatened one of the 17 females. He would talk -- 18 Q Who is Dave? 19 A David Miller is the physical therapist, and he 20 offered to take him out back and punch him out once. 21 MS. LORI: And again, I'm going to object. 22 I assume you weren't there when this occurred and so 23 it's hearsay upon which you're giving this 24 information? 25 THE WITNESS: Correct. 28 1 MS. LORI: I object, and I move to strike on 2 that. 3 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 4 Q Let me make an offer of proof. Is it within your 5 responsibility as director of CDC, would it be a routine 6 matter to be made aware of this type of situation? 7 A Oh, sure. 8 Q Would it also be a routine matter for you to have 9 to address the situation? 10 A Sure. 11 Q Did you end up having to make certain decisions 12 on how to deal with the, you know, physical threat that he 13 made on Mr. Miller? 14 A We did not deal with that one, because Mr. Miller 15 felt that he had it under control, he simply refused the 16 offer to go out back. 17 Q But you tried -- well, by that, I'm getting, you 18 had to try to address that issue? 19 A Right. What we did in that was to make a 20 decision that we would have no single therapist working, 21 because we were working late. Uhm, David ended up -- I 22 can't remember if Photius didn't want David or if David 23 felt burnt out, too, at that point. We assigned another 24 therapist. All my other therapists are female; and for 25 security reasons, required that the female, that the 29 1 therapist see him in twos. So we would schedule PT and OT, 2 or OT and speech together so that we at least had a little 3 comfort. But we did a lot of planning that way, okay, how 4 can we handle this. 5 Q PT is physical therapy? 6 A Correct. 7 Q OT is? 8 A Occupational therapy. 9 Q Okay. Just for the record. Now, you said he 10 never really physically threatened any of the female staff 11 you had? 12 A Correct. 13 Q But were there problems specifically in terms of 14 any anger issues that he -- 15 A He was very angry. 16 MS. LORI: If I can interject here? 17 THE WITNESS: I've seen him, yes. 18 MS. LORI: If you have personal knowledge of 19 this? 20 THE WITNESS: I have personal knowledge, 21 yes. 22 MS. LORI: Okay. 23 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 24 Q Go ahead. 25 A Yeah, I have been there, yes. Uhm, you know, he 30 1 gets in your face; he would try to tell you he wants you to 2 do -- and he has done this with me, you know, I don't want 3 you using those balls, I want you, I want you to train her 4 on stairs, I want you to do it this way. And if you, you 5 know, try to tell him you're the therapist and you know 6 what you're doing, he'll get in your face and he'll say 7 he's the parent and he knows what's best. And he's done 8 that with me and with all the therapist, and he won't let 9 go of it. 10 Q When he says this, what is his personal, I mean, 11 how do you describe his person? 12 A In your face big time. 13 Q Angry? 14 A Uh-huh. 15 Q Loud? 16 A Uh-huh. 17 Q Out of control? You're saying uh-huh, I assume 18 it's yes? 19 A Yes. Yes, loud, uhm, I don't know that you can 20 say out of control because he never really hit anybody. 21 But in the pediatric unit, uhm, you could hear him all over 22 the entire unit as well as the hallway that connects it to 23 the rest of the hospital. 24 Q This is not a situation that happened once or 25 twice? 31 1 A No, it was ongoing. We had, uhm, and it was at 2 more than one site, also. We had, he was -- when we 3 finally came to the point where we were saying we will use 4 the ball, we really need to, and we will do it this way, he 5 would get so upset with us, we had security standing by. 6 And he would just be loud and belligerent, and we finally 7 had to ban him from the hospital, uhm -- 8 Q That's at the recommendation of the hospital? 9 A The hospital attorney. 10 Q What is his status in the hospital? 11 A He's persona non gratis. He's only to come to 12 the hospital if he is in a medical emergency. 13 Q Do you have a lot of parents who fall into that 14 category? 15 MS. LORI: Objection as to relevancy. 16 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 17 Q Go ahead and answer. 18 A No, I've never done that before, ever. 19 Q Eventually, because -- 20 A Can I continue on that a little bit? 21 Q Sure. 22 A I should say we probably have, at any given time, 23 we always have five or six parents that we consider at risk 24 to us, I mean, where there are really custody issues; and 25 we deal with, at any given time, dozens and dozens and 32 1 dozens of drug addicts or people that are using, so we're 2 used to having people that are potentially dangerous. But 3 I've never had to do a persona non gratis on somebody else, 4 because it wasn't that ongoing, always happening type of 5 problem that we had with Photius. 6 Q Do you feel -- eventually he was not involved, 7 physically involved, you know, to be there with the therapy 8 for Teddy, correct? 9 A Correct. 10 Q Because of the fact that the hospital had him as 11 persona non gratis? 12 A Correct. And we actually saw him after that some 13 at our Joy site. 14 Q Joy site? 15 A Our Joy Preschool site. 16 Q It's in a different location? 17 A It's in a different location. And then when we 18 finally could square away that she could come to toddler 19 school, we could provide the therapies during toddler 20 school and there wasn't any, then we didn't need to see him 21 other than the picking the child up. 22 Q Was there a time when he wasn't allowed to be in 23 the therapy session at all, but tried to be present by 24 looking through the window? 25 A Right. 33 1 Q Can you describe that? 2 A That was the last part of the time that he was, 3 uhm, that we were providing therapy at the hospital. The 4 pediatric pavilion at RVMC is totally glassed around on the 5 outside; and we asked, we essentially insisted that he no 6 longer be in the therapy sessions, and Susan backed us up. 7 And then what he would do would be go to the glass window 8 outside and yell directions at us through the glass about, 9 don't put on her on that ball, etcetera. 10 Q How did that affect the therapy session? 11 A Disruptive; it's really hard and it was really 12 hard on Teddy because she's got her dad yelling from 13 outside, and she has at that point her mom who would be 14 visibly upset, the therapist treating -- and going back to 15 direct knowledge, I was never the therapist treating in 16 those, but in a lot of that situation I was standing by 17 with security outside, partly because I felt really 18 responsible. This is, this is late in the evening, there's 19 limited people here, I have asked my therapist to stay late 20 to work with this person they're very uncomfortable with; 21 so I ended up just being present to try to assure the best 22 situation we could. 23 Q What did he actually want? 24 MS. LORI: Well, objection, I mean, unless 25 she can read his mind, if that was your question. 34 1 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 2 Q What did he actually voice to you as to what he 3 wanted? 4 A Well, it varied at different times in Teddy's 5 development; uhm, he has had particular things. He really, 6 really wanted us to teach her to walk up and down stairs; 7 he thought if we taught her to walk up and down stairs, 8 that would make her a better walker. We were real 9 resistant to that because she had very, very poor balance 10 because of the motor problems that she had, and just even 11 the idea of working on stairs with her was not therapeutic, 12 and a danger to her. 13 Uhm, then the most recently, over the last 14 winter, he, we had orthotics for her, he did not want the 15 orthotics; he wanted to put shin guards on her, like little 16 soccer shin guards that would lock her knees straight 17 because that was going to help her walk. And that again is 18 anti-therapeutic and dangerous because what she needed was 19 to be able to flex her knees. And it's, it would be, if I, 20 if I restricted your knees so that you couldn't bend them 21 and then put you on a rolling ship at sea, you would fall 22 pretty quick because you couldn't adjust your balance to 23 the movement of the ship. Well, in a lot of ways, Teddy's 24 body kind of moves like that; she's got a lot of kind of 25 constant movement that she can't control very well, and she 35 1 needs badly to develop the balance so that she can control 2 the body better. And by locking your knees, you can't, you 3 can't adjust your body on an ongoing basis. So it not only 4 was exactly counter to what would be therapeutic for the 5 child, it was dangerous. 6 And so we would, we would be in conflicts like 7 that. So we would send her home in orthotics and he would 8 take the orthotics off, put her in shin guards, send her 9 back to school in the shin guards, we would take the shin 10 guards off and put her back in. So it went back and forth. 11 Q So he's basically self treating the child? 12 A Right. 13 Q Do you feel you tried working with him? 14 A Oh, yes, I really, I really, you know, Photius 15 loves his child and I have no doubt about that at all. And 16 I think part of the reason that he, part of the reason that 17 he took particular offense to me personally was just a 18 response in the beginning when he was so upset and so much 19 in pain about having this child in child care and 20 everything. I spent a fair amount of time and some long 21 conversations trying to reassure him that child care wasn't 22 necessarily bad; that a lot of times it was harder on the 23 parent than the child; that what you needed to do was to 24 take the energy and assure that you had a good child care 25 site and things to look for in a good provider and, you 36 1 know, you had a responsibility to do that. And I was 2 trying to be supportive and educate him and relieve his bad 3 feelings some. 4 And that was the basis for his obsession with -- 5 I put my kids in child care, and I don't normally say 6 personal things, but I had said something that, you know, I 7 had put my kids in child care and I know what it's like, 8 it's very difficult, and what you need to do is, you know, 9 just double check your situation and etcetera. And that 10 one conversation was where all of the comments that later 11 came about how I, you know, I was such a bad person because 12 I had put my own kids in child care came from. 13 Q Now, you mentioned that you deal with a lot of 14 parents who have, you know, a lot of things going on with 15 them, either drug and alcohol issues or criminal activity; 16 what do you think, how would you describe Photius in your 17 dealings with him? 18 A I think it's not -- we do deal with a lot of 19 addicts and things, but probably the one thing that all 20 parents have in common that is particular to parents we 21 work with is that we are dealing with parents in the very 22 early stages of grief. 23 Q Grief because their child -- 24 A Because their child is damaged. Most people who 25 have an eight or ten or 12 year old child who's Down 37 1 Syndrome or cerebral policy have had those years to adjust 2 and accept their child with their disabilities. Those 3 first couple, three, sometimes four years are a very 4 painful time for the best, most well-adjusted family. They 5 have to grieve for the child they thought they were going 6 to have and lost, you know, the future football player or 7 physician or lawyer or whatever they were going to be. You 8 know, you have a dream of a child when you're pregnant with 9 them, and you lose that. And then you have this child 10 who's damaged in their place. And all of the pain and the 11 ambivalence that goes with accepting that, we're used to 12 seeing in all of our parents, whether it's a drug addict or 13 whether it's a physician. And -- 14 Q In Photius, though, you saw this in Photius and 15 in Susan, also? 16 A Uh-huh. 17 Q Eventually in Photius, the anger that he was 18 exhibiting never subsided? 19 A No. The anger, the anger grew, you know, it's, 20 you know, I personally believe from my psychiatric 21 experience that it, you know, he's displacing a lot of his 22 frustration and pain into, and worry into anger, you know, 23 at the American women. Just, you know, it's all their 24 fault; if it wasn't for American women, my daughter would 25 be all right. And he's locked there; he's not making any 38 1 progress in a grieving process, and moving on to more 2 adjustment and acceptance of Teddy for who she is. 3 Q You have never seen an improvement? 4 A Huh-uh. I've seen a worsening, a worsening that 5 concerns me. 6 Q Do you think that he might be dangerous? 7 MS. LORI: Objection as to relevancy. And 8 not only that, I don't know when the last time she saw 9 Mr. Coutsoukis, but I would say her information could 10 possibly be dated so her opinion would potentially be 11 invalid. 12 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 13 Q Well, let me give a little more background. In 14 your -- you've been dealing with Mr. Coutsoukis and Teddy, 15 the family, up until they moved to New York, correct? 16 A Uh-huh. 17 Q And so even though -- are you personally afraid 18 of Mr. Coutsoukis? 19 MS. LORI: Objection as to relevancy. 20 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 21 Q Go ahead and answer. 22 A Yes. 23 Q Why so? 24 A I think, uhm, I -- he's not diagnosed, I am not a 25 physician to diagnose; he appears to me to be obsessive 39 1 compulsive personality. He's putting a lot of denial in 2 reality and it is mounting. He is a much more intensely 3 unhappy person when I last saw him in April than he was 4 when I first met him in early summer of '95. And when, 5 historically when a person really obsesses on something, 6 like he's obsessing on American women, you're displacing 7 anxiety and displacing pain. But it doesn't heal it, 8 doesn't make it go away. And so if you obsess more because 9 the pain, you know, is greater, then eventually it cracks. 10 And I have great concerns that Photius could, 11 quote unquote, crack, in the modern vernacular, I guess, 12 and that he could be dangerous to himself and possibly to 13 Teddy. 14 Q Possibly to Teddy, why so? 15 A Because if he so strongly believes that our 16 society is awful and his poor child is suffering from our 17 society, and he isn't making any progress in seeing any 18 positive future, uhm, you always worry that there is one 19 way out of that, you know, that he could just, he could 20 take himself and Teddy. And if he doesn't flee to Greece, 21 the other way out is a more violent one. 22 Q Has he ever talked about fleeing to Greece with 23 Teddy? 24 A No. 25 Q How about himself? 40 1 A Fleeing? 2 Q Uh-huh, or leaving? 3 A No, he's never. 4 Q Are you afraid for yourself? 5 A Uhm, I was more so, of course, when he lived 6 here; uhm, not so much as when he's in New York. Yeah, I, 7 I don't think he's stable and I know that he is very 8 unhappy with me, and I sort of am one of the 9 representatives of those nasty professional American women 10 that have screwed his life up so bad. So, you know, I 11 don't sit up nights and worry about it; but I certainly am 12 not comfortable with the man, and can see that he could be 13 dangerous. 14 Q Now, he's written you a letter, several letters, 15 I understand, one which I'll have marked as Exhibit 1. 16 (Document was marked for identification 17 as Deposition Exhibit No. 1.) 18 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 19 Q Can you please identify this letter? 20 A Okay. This is one of the early letters that he 21 wrote me, or he -- almost all of them are faxed to me. 22 Q Is this the only letter that he has written you? 23 A No, I have a file of them. This was probably a 24 little more polite than several of them. I also have a 25 tape that the staff at one of the sites made when he was 41 1 being particularly loud and aggressive on the phone. 2 MS. LORI: Do you still have that tape in 3 your possession? 4 THE WITNESS: I do. 5 MS. LORI: Can you produce that to me before 6 the hearing, Cristina? 7 MS. SANZ: I don't have it in my possession; 8 I learned of it just today. 9 MS. LORI: Okay. 10 THE WITNESS: Yeah, see this was, this is, 11 the fax date on this is March 30th of '95, so this was 12 a fairly early one. 13 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 14 Q What did you make of this letter? He talks about 15 something about liability? 16 A Yeah, I think I would need to put my, uhm, it is 17 my standard policy when a parent is unhappy, you know, 18 especially, you know, Teddy was enrolled in our handicap 19 program that is funded with educational dollars as well as 20 medical insurance dollars, and so I have an obligation to a 21 parent when they're unhappy to say, you know, if you don't 22 agree with me, uhm, if you don't, uhm, you know, if I can't 23 give you some satisfaction, then you need to know that I 24 have a supervisor in the regional educational program and 25 you can talk to them or you can file a grievance against 42 1 me; you know, it's a parent's right, it's legal, you know, 2 you can file a grievance against us and he would get 3 involved. And then if you don't find satisfaction with 4 him, you know, you could take that grievance to the 5 department above that level. 6 I'm sure that that's what this is referring to, 7 that I was trying to tell him if you're not happy, you 8 know, there are channels that you can go through. And he 9 responded with no intention of suing. 10 Q You mentioned that there are worse letters that 11 were written by Mr. Coutsoukis to you? 12 A Uh-huh. 13 Q Do you remember what some of them said? 14 A Uhm, he, on several instances, refers to my 15 vagina in different situations. He refers to how I have 16 screwed up my children and how they don't have a chance 17 because I put them in day care, you know. He doesn't even 18 know how many children I have, of course. Just how awful I 19 am, that I really don't have the concerns of the children, 20 that my ambition blinds me to the real needs of the kids. 21 It's, the same theme is here, only it's more offensive. 22 Q You also mentioned a tape that was made. Was 23 that something that you had planned, you know, a tape of a 24 telephone conversation? 25 A No. He, my kind of procedure is to say, you 43 1 know, Photius, I don't want you to talk like that or I find 2 that offensive or I need you to stop that. And then if he 3 doesn't, I hang up on him. And at one -- I hung up on him 4 at the hospital at one point, and he called the Joy site, 5 Joy Preschool site and was demanding to talk to me, and he 6 was very nasty. And I'm really not exactly sure if, if he 7 called a couple of times and they found it so upsetting 8 that they taped it when he called to give it to me. 9 Q So you did not tape this? 10 A I did not tape it. My staff was upset by it and 11 thought I ought to know about it, and taped it to give to 12 me. And so it had to be more than one call, because they 13 wouldn't have automatically taped the first call. I don't 14 have the exact -- the reason was they wanted me to know 15 about it. And then he called the security, the switchboard 16 at the hospital and was giving this poor switchboard 17 operator this ranting about -- 18 MS. LORI: Again, objection as to hearsay. 19 THE WITNESS: Okay. 20 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 21 Q There were concerns -- 22 A Yes. 23 Q -- you got notice later of concerns, security 24 concerns? 25 A Yes. Security called me at home to tell me what 44 1 happened with the switchboard and what did I want done 2 about it. 3 Q By that time, he was persona non gratis at the 4 hospital? 5 A That was -- I don't believe -- I believe that was 6 the last straw, actually. 7 Q You have copies of these letters? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And you have a copy of this tape? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Would you make that available to myself for 12 Ms. Lori? 13 A Yes, sure. 14 Q There was one concern, you also received a 15 concern from probably Dr. Williams' staff or from a medical 16 doctor's staff about a physical examination for Teddy; can 17 you relate what that concern was? 18 A They had actually called my staff asking for some 19 guidance, if there was a better way to work Mr. Coutsoukis; 20 because he had brought Teddy in for an apparent vaginal 21 infection and then he would not let them examine her. 22 Q Who is they, who called? 23 A One of the staff at the Medford Clinic had called 24 our people wanting to know is there, is there something you 25 do that will make Mr. -- is there a better way to approach 45 1 Mr. Coutsoukis that he'll be more comfortable, because he 2 was very inappropriate here, he wouldn't let us touch the 3 child, we couldn't do the exam. And they were concerned. 4 And I didn't have any good advice to offer them. 5 Q Now, what is your, what -- I'm going to ask you 6 about Mrs. Coutsoukis. When you first met her, did you 7 have concerns about her, about her appropriateness in 8 dealing with Teddy? 9 A Oh, no. When I, I remember very clearly the 10 first time I met her was when we sat down with she and 11 Photius and I to describe what our program was and how we 12 could meet their needs and sort of get the process going. 13 And she seemed a sad woman at that time, but very 14 appropriate. 15 Q Was she -- 16 A Kind of quiet. 17 Q Did she understand everything and, you know, sort 18 of knew exactly how -- I guess what I'm asking was she the 19 perfect parent when you first met her? 20 A No. No. She's a pleasant lady and also very 21 dedicated to her child. She didn't have a lot of knowledge 22 about a lot of, you know, kind of basic, you know, child 23 development things. What is, what is an appropriate time 24 to be teaching a child colors, for instance, you know, she 25 didn't have that kind of information. 46 1 Q Did Mr. Coutsoukis have that? 2 A No, most certainly not, and still doesn't. 3 MS. LORI: Objection, lack of personal 4 knowledge on that. 5 THE WITNESS: That since April, correct, I 6 can't say past April on that. 7 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 8 Q Since April of 1997? 9 A Correct. You know, so she needed to learn a lot 10 about how you talk to a child to enhance language; you 11 know, you don't talk for a child, you wait and ask, you 12 know, wait for the child to answer. You know, those kinds 13 of child development tips or tricks. You know, she didn't 14 have them naturally or, you know, any large experience. 15 She did listen, she did learn, she asked lots of questions, 16 and she seemed to follow through. 17 Q And in your dealings with her as time went, she 18 was always appropriate? 19 A Uh-huh. 20 Q Yes? 21 A Yes. Yes. Like I said, not the perfect parent 22 as far as knowing everything; but yes, she was always 23 appropriate and nurturing. 24 Q You had concerns that sometimes you had to work 25 with her to -- that she would be accommodating of the way 47 1 Photius wanted physical therapy to go or not to go? 2 A Correct. 3 Q You found that to be the case? 4 A Right. If she, it amazed me because she was a 5 professional woman and seemed so in charge in her business 6 life type of thing, but she was very reluctant to do 7 anything counter to Photius. And that was detrimental to 8 the therapy in the beginning in that she didn't want to do 9 things that Photius said no to, even though it was a step 10 for her to stand up to him and say, no, I want, uhm, I 11 want -- 12 MS. LORI: Well, objection as to personal 13 knowledge on that. 14 THE WITNESS: I've talked to her -- oh -- 15 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 16 Q Go ahead. Have you dealt with her directly? 17 A Yeah, we wanted Teddy to come to toddler school, 18 and Photius wouldn't let her. And we had to, you know, 19 kind of -- we approached Susan and encouraged Susan to kind 20 of stand up for that because we thought that was really 21 important that Teddy be around other children for language 22 models; you know, children learn to talk better talking to 23 other children. And so we sort of encouraged -- not sort 24 of, we encouraged Susan to take a stand that she should be 25 able to come to toddler school. And she did, eventually. 48 1 Q So she has sort of evolved over time? 2 A Yes. It was, when I said listen and learn 3 earlier, like she originally said no, no, you can't put her 4 on the ball, you know, that would upset -- and when we 5 explained why, she would go away and think about it and 6 come back and then ask more questions, and then be a little 7 more comfortable with the ball. And so it was a process 8 with her that it was beginning to make sense to her why we 9 wanted to do things with Teddy this way or that way. Uhm, 10 I think she learned a lot. 11 Q Was she very concerned about the opposition that 12 her husband had and, you know, expressed that towards you, 13 that she was sort of nervous about taking a stand for 14 herself? 15 A Sure. Sure. Yes, and she has directly expressed 16 that on more than one occasion. 17 Q You have had an opportunity -- 18 A On multiple occasions. 19 Q Okay. You have had an opportunity to review 20 Dr. Oas' report that he, I believe faxed a copy or sent you 21 a copy? 22 A Uh-huh. 23 Q Yes? 24 A Yes, he did. 25 Q And that report is dated May 10, 1997, correct? 49 1 A Correct. 2 MS. SANZ: Counsel, are you going to be 3 submitting that, or do you want -- 4 MS. LORI: Yes, I'm having Dr. Oas, he's 5 going to testify. 6 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 7 Q Okay. Now, Dr. Oas never contacted you during 8 the time he was doing this evaluation? 9 A No. 10 Q Did he contact any members of your staff? 11 A No. This came as a complete shock. 12 Q A complete shock that you received it, or 13 complete shock as to what his findings were? 14 A Both. You know, we weren't expecting it, and 15 were certainly surprised by the conclusions. 16 Q Okay. In one of the, in his, in his report, he, 17 I would say he insinuates or maybe makes it that 18 Mr. Photius -- Mr. Coutsoukis stated or implied that Teddy 19 going to CDC was a way of trying to deny access to Photius, 20 to the dad; and that was sort of something that the mother, 21 Mrs. Coutsoukis, was trying to do, putting her child in CDC 22 was a way to deny him access. Did you find that to be the 23 case? 24 A No. That sort of infers, you know, that Teddy 25 had, was at Child Development like a day care center. And 50 1 we were only providing her with two days a week for a 2 couple of hours, and then maybe an occasional, toddler 3 school was two days a week for an hour and a half, and then 4 she might have had a therapy time besides that. We weren't 5 talking about great amounts of time that would be used for 6 instead of his custodial time. 7 Q And, in fact, in your dealings with 8 Mrs. Coutsoukis, did she ever have you try to deny 9 information concerning Teddy to Mr. Coutsoukis? 10 A The program? 11 Q Did she ever tell you, don't give Mr. Coutsoukis 12 any information about what's going on with Teddy? 13 A No, no, no. 14 Q I don't want him to -- 15 A No. She was, uhm, she did once; it had nothing 16 to do with our program. She had, she was very excited that 17 she had set up a therapeutic horseback riding opportunity 18 for Teddy and was just, she wanted to tell us because she 19 knew that would please us because it is a very nice thing 20 for children, but was very worried that Photius would find 21 out and stop it. So she asked us please at that time, 22 don't tell him, don't tell him I'm doing this with Teddy. 23 That's the only time she ever said don't hold anything. 24 Q But in terms of your own -- 25 A Our reports and everything, no, she never asked 51 1 us to withhold anything. And we went to great effort to 2 make sure that he had everything in writing that she had. 3 And, I mean, that's just a philosophical. They're both 4 custodial parents, they had those legal rights, and we 5 tried to be very conscientious about that. 6 Q Did she act in any way to make you think or 7 suspect her that she was trying to deny Mr. Coutsoukis 8 access to this child, to their child? 9 A No. 10 Q Dr. Oas' report, I think later on on page four, 11 makes a statement that "Mr. Coutsoukis sees Mrs. Samora's 12 interactions with Teddy as expedient and parent centered 13 rather than child centered." And I think goes on to say 14 prior, before that, that she's less emotionally ever 15 present with the child. Do you agree with that? 16 A Actually, I agree with that completely, but not 17 necessarily in the same context. Photius is so overbearing 18 emotionally that it's inappropriate, it's totally 19 overwhelming to the child. Yes, Susan is less emotionally 20 ever present, ever bearing; she's much more appropriate. 21 One of the concerns with Photius is this very, 22 very strong force; and he also thinks for the child. Uhm, 23 he, he'll tell you what she's feeling. And he'll tell you 24 because, you know, he has this special relationship and 25 this special language with Teddy; but in reality, what he's 52 1 telling you a lot of times is not possible, it's not 2 developmentally appropriate, and he's, he's thinking for 3 her. 4 Q Would an example -- was there a concern he had 5 about Teddy putting things in her mouth when she was at 6 that age when she would, when I think young infants or 7 toddlers would try to put something in their mouth? 8 A Uh-huh. 9 Q What was his reaction to that? 10 A Uhm, I can't remember, I'm afraid I can't 11 remember the details to that as accurately as someone else 12 may. I remember it didn't make sense. And when we tried 13 to explain to him that mouthing behavior in young children 14 is typical and it's an exploratory way, it wasn't 15 acceptable. But I can't remember what -- he had, uhm, a 16 whole rationale that just doesn't connect at all, but I 17 can't think of what it is right off hand. 18 Another example that's more recent is that he 19 would pick Teddy up at preschool and he would go out to put 20 her in the car. And it would frequently take him 30 21 minutes to get out of the parking lot because he would go 22 to strap her in and she would make some movement or some 23 sound, and so he would have this long conversation with 24 what it was that she really wanted, when she very 25 frequently, I mean, you could watch and tell that she's 53 1 just being a playful two-year-old operating, testing 2 limits. And he's trying to have a fairly in depth 3 conversation about what her needs were, and reading things 4 back from her, when she's just being a two-year-old. 5 Q He also makes -- 6 A Let me -- she was three, but she's acting more 7 like developmentally a two-year-old. 8 Q Okay. Uhm, you made already some comments about 9 day care and his opposition to that. He states that this 10 is a reason for her failure to thrive. Do you see that at 11 all as feasible in this case? 12 A No. No. 13 Q You know one of the care takers, one of the 14 former care takers of Teddy, that was Donna Carillo; is 15 that correct? 16 A Uh-huh. 17 Q Is that correct? 18 A Yes, it is. 19 Q And how do you know her? 20 A She had a child also that was a special needs 21 child in our program, Caleb, who's a couple of years older 22 than Teddy is. 23 Q And you met her and observed her? 24 A Yes. 25 Q What would you say -- I mean, is she an 54 1 appropriate caretaker for Teddy? 2 A Sure, yeah. She was not a really bright lady; 3 she wasn't the cutting edge of, you know, child development 4 philosophy types of things; but she was a very appropriate, 5 pleasant lady, very calm, sort of the salt of the earth 6 type person that wouldn't be too rattled by anything and 7 could take a child for where the child was and work with 8 them there. 9 Q Do you think if Teddy entered day care in the 10 future, would that be, would that be harmful to her? 11 What's your opinion of that? 12 MS. LORI: Objection as to speculation; 13 you're asking her to think about something that's 14 going to occur in the future. 15 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 16 Q Okay. Let me ask again. She has been in day 17 care in the past; do you know whether that has been a 18 harmful experience to her that has caused whatever medical 19 and behavioral problems that she may experience now? 20 A There is no way that problems in day care would 21 cause the problems that she has now. I can't speak that, 22 you know, she hasn't been unhappy in a day care, you know, 23 I wouldn't know that, but -- 24 Q And her being around other children who are not 25 impaired can be a positive, or is a positive -- 55 1 A Very positive, yeah. 2 Q You actually encourage that? 3 A Right. And that's, in all of our three and 4 four-year-old preschool sites, we have typically developing 5 children with our handicapped children, specifically for 6 that reason so that we have a model for the children. If 7 we want children to develop good language, they will learn 8 it a whole lot faster from another three and four-year-old 9 than they will from a speech therapist saying, now say 10 this. They're just much more motivated to be like their 11 peers. And so we always look for somebody that's a little 12 more capable for them to model after. 13 Q One of doctor -- 14 A And they have fun. 15 Q One of Dr. Oas' recommendations on page six is 16 that Teddy be co-parented with the least amount of 17 interparental conflict. Do you think that's possible in 18 this case from your experience in dealing with both 19 parties? 20 A It never worked in the time that they were with 21 us, uhm, because Mr. Coutsoukis has his way and his way is 22 the way. And in all, whether it's listening to the 23 therapist or whether it's what the, you know, child needs 24 in feeding, it's his way; and if it's not his way, it's the 25 wrong way. So there's no learning. There has to be give 56 1 and take, and I have never observed give on his part. 2 Q On page seven, letter D, he also makes a 3 recommendation that "Teddy develop skills to resolve 4 conflict and calm herself and others when she is thrust 5 into unbalanced environmental or relationship crisis;" what 6 do you think of that recommendation? 7 A It's not developmentally appropriate. In the 8 beginning, he said that he was going to look at Teddy's 9 developmental needs, and assumptions regarding each 10 parent's capacity; and he never really has addressed 11 Teddy's developmental abilities or understanding. But even 12 if Teddy was a typically developing three-year-old, it is 13 not appropriate that three-year-olds, four-year-olds, even 14 a five-year-old typically developing kid have conflict 15 resolution skills. You start introducing those kind of 16 concepts to late four, early five, in how to not fight with 17 your friend over a candy bar, a very, very concrete kind of 18 thing. Uhm, to be able to handle and balance conflict and 19 stress, particularly in relationships with your parents, is 20 way beyond an impaired three-year-old. 21 Q There's also a statement he makes in that same 22 page seven that sort of values that if one parent is more 23 available, that that might be the better custodial parent. 24 Do you see -- what really makes the better custodial 25 parent, in your opinion? 57 1 MS. LORI: Well, objection. I mean, that's 2 going to open up a whole new subject to debate and I 3 think we'll call the judge on that one; because how I 4 raise my children may be completely different from how 5 you raise your children, and my style may be perfect 6 for my children and likewise yours, but they're 7 completely opposite. 8 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 9 Q Well, I'll make it specific to this case. 10 Specific to this case, do you think Mr. Coutsoukis' 11 availability of time with Teddy makes him, per se, a better 12 parent for her? 13 A No. Mr. Coutsoukis, just like he doesn't listen 14 and learn from adults, he really doesn't listen and learn 15 well from his child. He reads his interpretation of what 16 his child needs, just like when he deals with us, he tells 17 us what needs to happen. He knows what needs to happen for 18 Teddy without really understanding what Teddy's needs are. 19 So Teddy's ability to grow up and tell this man she feels 20 this way and needs this, is essentially non-existent 21 because he knows what she needs. Does that make sense? 22 Q Yes. Dr. Oas also says that, uhm, describes 23 Mr. Coutsoukis as "a one-dimensional personality and one 24 that he highly values because he knows he has a daughter in 25 crisis and he will not settle for anything less than the 58 1 best care possible of her." Do you agree with that 2 statement, or how do you respond to that? 3 A In the entire time that we worked with him, he 4 did, he consistently across the board settled for less than 5 the best care because we offered him the best care and got 6 all sorts of proof that we certainly have the best care. 7 You know, I have letters of recommendation from the State, 8 we have a high quality program; and he consistently would 9 not let us provide best care. So he will not settle for 10 anything less than the best care possible for her is 11 totally untrue; he has never accepted the best care 12 possible for her from the multitudes of conventional people 13 will tell you is the best care. 14 Q Because he's not open to options? 15 A Because he's not open to options, and he's not 16 open to thinking about options. If he can't, if he can't 17 change an opinion from constant input, and we all look at 18 any situation and we have incoming information and we 19 change our opinion; and other situations change and more 20 incoming information comes, and we change our opinion. And 21 his rigidity stops him from doing that. So, you know, I 22 see him as an obsessive personality, uhm, that is rigid and 23 certainly not one to be highly valued. Rigidity is not, by 24 most people, considered a valuable parenting, uhm, 25 component. 59 1 Q Characteristic? 2 A Characteristic. 3 Q Do you think David Oas knows Teddy? 4 MS. LORI: Well, objection; that's too 5 speculative. 6 THE WITNESS: Yeah, this report does not say 7 that. There's nothing, I can't say -- there's nothing 8 in this report that says Teddy's abilities are -- and 9 he says he couldn't test Teddy -- uhm, and there's 10 nothing in here that indicates that he has an 11 understanding of her cognitive or emotional abilities. 12 There's actually very little in this report that says 13 what Teddy is able to do. 14 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 15 Q In your opinion, what do you see as, you know, if 16 you were to advise the Court as to what you see Teddy's 17 plan should be, what her needs, how she needs to be best 18 cared for, what would that be? 19 MS. LORI: And just let me interject because 20 I know where you're going to go with this, I'm going 21 to object; I don't think she really has the expertise 22 as does Dr. Oas to make essentially what you're asking 23 her to do, is to make a custody evaluation. 24 MS. SANZ: I'm asking her to give a 25 description of Teddy's needs, and I think that falls 60 1 very much in line, whether it be medical or social, 2 with the services that she has been receiving from the 3 center. So go ahead and answer the question. 4 THE WITNESS: Ask it again, because I'm 5 not -- 6 MS. SANZ: Okay. Can you read that back, 7 please? 8 (The court reporter then read back as 9 requested.) 10 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 11 Q In other words, what does she need? 12 A Yeah, she needs, uhm, she needs therapy. 13 Q Physical therapy? 14 A Physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech 15 therapy, and an educational program that will continue to 16 evaluate her potential, because we do not understand that 17 yet clearly, like I was saying earlier, and will enhance 18 that functional ability as much as possible. She needs, 19 she needs to be getting as much learning opportunity now as 20 possible so that she stands a chance to better fit in with 21 her peers when she's five, six, seven. 22 Q Okay. And do you have an opinion as to which 23 parent can provide those type, provide for Teddy in that 24 way? 25 A Between the two, Susan for sure. 61 1 Q Why is that? 2 A Again, I think I sound probably a little like a 3 broken record, because I don't see Photius modifying his 4 thoughts or opinions or, at all; I don't see him learning 5 anything about child development. Uhm, and he doesn't 6 appear to be interested in learning about child 7 development. Uhm, and his, his obsessive personality I 8 still consider is a possibly dangerous situation. 9 Q How would you see Mr. Coutsoukis being involved 10 in Teddy's life? 11 A I, I -- and I know Photius will probably have 12 trouble believing this, but, you know, I know he loves this 13 child greatly, and I really appreciate the love that he has 14 for the child and the amount of pain that he has regarding 15 this child. For his benefit, I think he should have right 16 to see the child regularly; I think it would be, you know, 17 sad for him not to be able to. But because he is so 18 inappropriate so frequently, it should be a supervised 19 situation, if I had the say. 20 Q Okay. Thank you. 21 22 CROSS EXAMINATION 23 BY MS. LORI: 24 Q Did you meet Mr. Coutsoukis first then in 1995? 25 A I'm trying to think if it was '95 or '94, you 62 1 know, time flies when you're having -- but I've got records 2 here I can look at if you don't know right away. 3 Q I don't know. 4 A Okay. I'm getting too old too fast. I don't 5 think that goes on the record. 6 MS. SANZ: It's all on the record. 7 MS. LORI: Yeah, I want it on the record. 8 THE WITNESS: Let's see. 9 MS. LORI: And while you're looking for 10 that -- 11 MS. SANZ: Do you want to take a break first 12 so she can just go through that quickly and I can go 13 to the lady's room? 14 MS. LORI: Oh sure. Let me pick up. 15 (A recess was then taken.) 16 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 17 Q Back on record. Mrs. Kozol, were you able to 18 find out when you first met Mr. Coutsoukis? 19 A It was the summer of '94. I believe the first 20 formal meeting was August 23rd of '94; we may have had a 21 shorter one before that. 22 Q Is it your recollection this it was Mr. Photius 23 who first contacted CDC rather than Dr. Williams? 24 A No, Dr. Williams talked to me before Photius did, 25 because Dr. Williams warned me about Photius. 63 1 Q Do you have any knowledge whether or not 2 Mr. Coutsoukis could have contacted CDC without your 3 knowledge to find out about the program in trying to enroll 4 Teddy in it? 5 A Just to call in to ask questions? Sure, maybe, a 6 lot of people can call to ask questions. And he may well 7 have called me asking questions; I didn't take a referral 8 from him, though, I took it from Dr. Williams. 9 Q Now, you're not a pediatric neurologist, correct? 10 A Correct. 11 Q And based on what you know of Teddy's conditions, 12 there's no knowledge about how her condition developed, 13 correct? No one can definitively say, yes, it was caused 14 because of genetics; or yes, it was caused because of 15 something that occurred at birth; or this reason or that? 16 MS. SANZ: Or do you know? 17 THE WITNESS: I am sure that a physician, a 18 pediatric neurologist, any neurologist would tell you 19 that it was, the great probability, that it was caused 20 before birth. Without being able to identify a 21 specific chromosome, they wouldn't be able to say 100 22 percent. 23 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 24 Q But you, yourself, are not a physician, correct? 25 A I'm not a physician. I have a lot -- 64 1 occupational therapist in training has lot of neurological 2 training; I've had multiple courses. 3 Q But you're not qualified to give a diagnosis 4 about whether or not Teddy Coutsoukis' condition was 5 genetically related, or caused at birth, or caused by some 6 other reason; is that correct? 7 A I did not give a diagnosis. There is no 8 diagnosis. 9 Q Correct. There's no diagnosis, and you would not 10 be qualified to give such a diagnosis, correct? 11 A Correct. But that's not what I did. I feel, and 12 I guess somebody could challenge it, I feel like I'm 13 definitely qualified to be able to say that she has a lot 14 of indicators that would indicate that the damage was done 15 before birth, such as facial features, bone structure, 16 motor delay. 17 Q Is one of Teddy's symptoms, for lack of a better 18 word, somewhat related to epilepsy? 19 A She has -- no. Uhm, can you ask that more 20 clearly? 21 Q Does she have seizures? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Are those seizures indicative of possibly being 24 some epilepsy being involved with her condition? 25 A No, can -- 65 1 Q Can you answer that question? 2 A Well, let me answer it, if I can make sense. 3 It's more likely that she has, she has brain damage which 4 causes, A, seizures; and B, motor imbalance; and C, 5 cognitive problems. So the epilepsy is a result of a 6 primary problem, not the primary problem. Just like the 7 other factors; the epilepsy is one of the symptoms of the 8 primary problem. Does that make sense? 9 Q Yes. As I understand what you're saying is brain 10 damage occurred first and epilepsy followed as a result -- 11 A As a result of the brain damage, yeah. 12 Q Are you aware of whether or not there's any 13 research that neurological damage can result from infantile 14 psychological trauma? 15 A Other than failure -- okay, again a little more 16 probably complex answer. Neurological damage could result 17 from poor nutrition, which could result from psychological 18 problem. Like we were talking earlier, the child that is 19 significantly depressed may not eat; and if they don't eat, 20 then, you know, and that's a significant enough problem, 21 you could have a neurological problem from that. But 22 that's kind of a more far fetched one. 23 Q So is it your position -- well, so my question 24 is, are you aware of there being any research on 25 neurological damage being caused by trauma that occurs to 66 1 an infant, and trauma being defined by some emotional event 2 as opposed to a physical event? And I'm asking whether or 3 not you know of any research on that? 4 A No. No. Uhm -- 5 Q And what I'm pulling out is Parents magazine 6 dated September 1997, and it's on page 54. And I realize 7 this is not, you know, something; but are you aware of a 8 study that was done examining the orphans in Romania, and a 9 discussion of how the neurological -- 10 A Oh, I'm very familiar with that. 11 Q And isn't that an indication that lack of contact 12 with people resulted in their nerves not developing as well 13 as they should? 14 A Yeah. The Romanian children are a classic 15 effect. I did read a bunch of stuff, not that article 16 particularly; in fact, maybe I did read that article if 17 it's about a particular child ending up being adopted. 18 Anyway, again, the children in Romania were taken; and 19 where they have the neurological damage is they didn't have 20 any stimulation. You know, they were put in a crib and 21 they were left in the crib. If you, you either -- you got 22 to stimulate it, you got to use it or lose it kind of 23 thing. All of your brain cells, all of the brain cells 24 you're ever going to have your entire life are formed by 25 the time you're six months olds. And then after six 67 1 months, it's all downhill; we've been losing brain cells 2 forever. Those brain cells are conceived until six months; 3 and then from six months to about three years they mature, 4 they myelinate, they branch out and make thought ways and 5 pathways, those kinds of thing. If you do not stimulate an 6 organism, it doesn't build brain cells. It's not an 7 emotional thing; again, it's a physiological thing. 8 Certainly emotional nurturing is a form of 9 stimulation. But those children in Romania were totally 10 ignored; they didn't have the loving cuddling, which is a 11 form of stimulation. And that, to me, is different than 12 like emotional pain because you're away from your parent. 13 What a baby organism, a little person needs, is loving 14 nurturing as a form of stimulation, just like bright colors 15 and sounds are forms of stimulation. If you remove a child 16 from a parent, that's not saying you're removing a child 17 from stimulation. Uhm -- 18 Q Are you assuming that if you remove the child 19 from the parent, that where that child will end up will 20 have a similar stimulating environment? 21 MS. SANZ: I'm going to object as to 22 relevancy. 23 MS. LORI: Well, one thing that you brought 24 up on cross-examination is what Ms. Kozol's, somewhat 25 opinion of what had occurred with this child and her 68 1 pointing to it as being some aspect that occurred at 2 birth; and I think it's pretty clear that, as you 3 pointed out on your direct before that, that 4 Mr. Coutsoukis has a different opinion. And I'd like 5 to explore that with Mrs. Kozol? 6 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Yeah, what a child 7 needs to develop the brain is stimulation. When 8 you're saying if you remove the child from the parent, 9 there's no stimulation. It's not the removal from the 10 parent that could cause neurological problem; it's the 11 removal from stimulation, appropriate stimulation that 12 could cause the damage. And the kids in Romania got 13 nothing, they got no loving, they got no light, they 14 didn't get fed regularly; and those kids are damaged 15 permanently. 16 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 17 Q You have no personal knowledge when Teddy first 18 went into day care, whether or not there was any sort of 19 stimulation? That's a fair question, right? 20 A That is a fair question. And that's what I tried 21 to coach and explain to Photius when I first met him, that 22 that was important, that he had, that it was definitely an 23 important thing for a parent to be responsible for picking 24 out the right child care environment and making sure that 25 it was the appropriate environment. And that all parents 69 1 needed to take that seriously and not just drop the kid off 2 someplace. 3 Q If I understand correctly, initially 4 Mr. Coutsoukis attended the appointments that were set for 5 Teddy; is that correct? 6 A We always invite parents. We really don't have 7 an appointment just for the child, we usually have the 8 appointment for the parent and the child, because it's a 9 learning duet. 10 Q And until he was banned, he attended almost all 11 of those appointments? 12 A He was very faithful. 13 Q Obviously he disagreed about how Teddy should be 14 treated? 15 A Right. 16 Q He wanted to be fully participatory in the 17 decisions about how she should be treated; is that correct? 18 A I would call it more than participatory. I mean, 19 he was always -- we invite all parents to be participatory, 20 not dictatorial. 21 Q And do you agree that when he was eventually 22 banned from Rogue Valley in attending the therapy 23 appointments, that that must have been extremely 24 frustrating for him? 25 A Yes, I do. 70 1 Q And one of the points I think Dr. Oas is making 2 is his desire to want to participate in the child's life. 3 And you agree that that's what he wants to do, correct? 4 A I, I don't know that participate is the right 5 word. 6 Q Okay. Do you agree with Dr. Oas' statement that 7 "He demands that he have the right to guide and direct the 8 network of care that Teddy will receive from others when he 9 cannot be there or when it seems most appropriate to have 10 assistance from professional personnel?" Do you want to 11 see that statement? 12 A I'm a visual learner, easier. 13 Q Page six. 14 A Six, okay. Where on page six? 15 Q Mr. Coutsoukis will make his relationship with 16 Teddy his top priority. And then the next sentence is he 17 demands -- 18 A He demands that he have the right to guide and 19 direct is not, is understated. He does not guide; he 20 tells. Uhm, and direct the network of care that Teddy will 21 receive from others when he cannot be there or when it 22 seems most appropriate to have assistance; uhm, we, we 23 really value a parent's place, I mean, the parent is the 24 most important place in that child's life. And we strongly 25 want parents to be the primary, we respect them as the 71 1 primary player. Uhm, but he did not guide. If he took the 2 right to direct the network of care, he certainly did that; 3 I mean, he was very demanding it will be this way. 4 Q So the answer to the question is he really wanted 5 to participate in Teddy's care? 6 A For sure. 7 Q All right. And with Teddy, do you agree that 8 having one-on-one attention is real important for her? 9 A And what kind of attention? 10 Q With one person, as opposed to putting her in a 11 day care center where the ratio of staff to children might 12 be one staff to 20 children? 13 A That's illegal, that doesn't exist. 14 Q Well, I'm just using that as an example. 15 A Uhm, I don't believe either one is the way. I 16 think the child needs a balance in both: She should have 17 one-on-one and she should have mixed social situations. 18 Q But you agree, don't you, that it's beneficial 19 she have one-on-one exposure? I mean, that's important to 20 her, too, right? 21 A Not if that's all she has. 22 Q Okay. That's not my question. I'm saying that 23 it's important that she have one-on-one experience? 24 A For sure. 25 Q And do you agree that it's preferable that a 72 1 small baby stay at home with one of the parents as opposed 2 to being put in an institutional day care? 3 A I didn't know we had institutional day care. 4 Q The distinction I'm drawing, I suppose, is 5 between family in home care as opposed to institutional 6 care such as what might occur at the YMCA where they have 7 more children, or at Blossom Hills where they have more 8 children? 9 MS. SANZ: I'm going to object as to 10 relevance. 11 THE WITNESS: Can I, well, can I make -- if 12 you object, can I still make a statement? Because 13 there are not -- 14 MS. SANZ: What happens is when we object, 15 the judge will rule on that. 16 THE WITNESS: Okay. In this state, uhm, in 17 order to provide infant care, it has to be a 18 one-to-four ratio; it can't be more than that legally. 19 So when you say institutional day care, that has, uhm, 20 you know, pictures of little kids lined up in Romania; 21 and that's not legal. If the question is, is a child 22 better off at home with a parent or in the legal 23 one-to-four day care center for an infant, whether 24 it's in somebody's home or Blossom Hills, I think it 25 depends on the family. 73 1 There are instances where, I mean, if the 2 parents are capable of being good parents, surely the 3 child should be at home. But parents aren't born or 4 trained in this state on how to be good parents. And 5 sometimes that one-to-four child care provider who 6 that's what she does for a living is care for children 7 and she learns about what's appropriate for children, 8 may be a better care provider than the parent who 9 doesn't know what they're doing. 10 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 11 Q That's fair enough. You're aware that 12 Mr. Coutsoukis wanted to take care of Teddy rather than put 13 Teddy in day care? 14 A I think so, yes. I got to quit shaking my head, 15 I'm sorry. 16 Q That's okay. 17 A Yes. 18 Q Were you aware that Mr. Coutsoukis had Teddy 19 enrolled in a child care setting at Superior Athletic Club, 20 were you ever aware of that? 21 A I believe so. I vaguely remember it. I can't, I 22 don't have details to go with it, but it seems like I know 23 that. 24 Q Could that have been, were you aware that that's 25 possibly why he said don't put her in the toddler school? 74 1 A No, I don't have any knowledge of what the 2 experience at Superior Courts was like. 3 Q But did you know that the reason he, as you said, 4 objected initially to putting Teddy in toddler school was 5 because he may have already enrolled her in the Superior 6 Athletic Club; do you have any knowledge about that? 7 A No. 8 Q Now, I thought you also said that -- 9 A Can I -- it's possible, and I'm not absolutely 10 sure that that Superior Athletic Club wasn't open when we 11 were first trying to get her in toddler school. It's a 12 fairly recent, and maybe I'm wrong, the dates could be, but 13 that's a fairly new building. 14 Q Are you referring to the Superior Athletic Club 15 that's out there on Barnett? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Are you aware that there is a much older Superior 18 Athletic Club, I believe located on Cardley Avenue near -- 19 A Well, I know he was going to the one on Barnett; 20 maybe he went to the old one before that, it's possible. 21 Q So is it my understanding that he initially 22 objected to the toddler school; and then the next time 23 around, Teddy went, he eventually agreed to let her go to 24 toddler school; is that what happened? 25 A Right. It was about a year. 75 1 Q So then the next year, Teddy went with 2 Mr. Coutsoukis' approval? 3 A I don't know how much Coutsoukis, or Photius 4 approved. I know that Susan said, this year I will make 5 sure that she goes. So the discussion between them, I'm 6 not party to. 7 Q Okay. So you don't know whether or not, then, 8 the next year he objected or approved; is that what you're 9 saying? 10 A Well, I mean, whether he approved of the whole 11 thing, I mean, she came, so -- 12 Q And so my question is she came, but you don't 13 know whether Mr. Coutsoukis said I approve or I continue to 14 object? 15 A I see that in shades, I guess is why I'm sort of 16 hesitating on how to answer it. Because I can't see him 17 ever saying I approve, because he didn't approve of much of 18 what we did. It was how strongly he objected. He 19 obviously didn't object as strongly as he did the first 20 year, or Susan was more adamant because she came. 21 Q Well, do you have any knowledge about what his 22 reaction was the year that Teddy did go to toddler school? 23 A Well, he would come and pick her up, and he was 24 frequently again still trying to tell us what to do or what 25 happened, or, uhm, or how we weren't doing things right. 76 1 Q But did he tell you, I object to her going to 2 toddler school? 3 A No. 4 Q As part of the evaluation that CDC -- and by 5 using CDC, I'm referring to Child Development Center -- did 6 they go to Mr. Coutsoukis' home and look at the home area? 7 A Uhm, I would have to go back and look at the 8 record because it would have been Shirley Steinson. And 9 when we first started serving them and they were still 10 together, I'm sure she was at the home. When she quit 11 going to the home, I would have to go back to the records 12 to look. 13 Q Is your answer that, yes, the home site was 14 looked at -- 15 A Yes. 16 Q -- whether or not Mr and Mrs. Coutsoukis were 17 living together or apart? 18 A Yes. Yeah, I do not know if we went to his home 19 after they were separated or we only went to hers; I can't 20 tell you that for sure. But I know in the beginning when 21 they were together, we were going into the home. 22 Q In any of the reports that -- and it was Shirley 23 Steinson, was that her name? 24 A Correct. 25 Q When she did these home evaluations, did any of 77 1 them reflect a negative evaluation concerning 2 Mr. Coutsoukis and his care for Teddy? 3 A I would have to go back and look specifically at 4 all the records. 5 MS. SANZ: I would object. She is going to 6 be based on speculation. 7 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 8 Q Then go ahead and look through your records so 9 you don't speculate. 10 A Okay. You want to just take a break like you did 11 before, for a while? 12 Q Yeah, let's just go off the record. 13 (Discussion off the record.) 14 THE WITNESS: The question was did she ever 15 find anything wrong in Photius, or anything -- 16 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 17 Q -- negative concerning his care for Teddy? 18 A Okay. Uhm, I'm not totally done with all of 19 this, but I, I'm up past the separation. And most, when we 20 chart on children, it's mostly what the child has done. 21 But there is no instance of anything wrong with the home. 22 There's nothing -- you're asking if we ever saw him do 23 anything wrong, or if there's anything wrong with the home 24 setting? I'm sorry to be obtuse. 25 Q If there was anything in those reports that show 78 1 that he was doing something wrong with Teddy, something 2 negative about his dealings with Teddy? 3 A I would not say anything negative. There are 4 comments about his interpreting sounds to mean things, you 5 know, that aren't necessarily developmentally correct. But 6 there's nothing in the full text of something wrong, no. 7 Maybe not the best choice, but nothing in a full negative 8 sense. Is that clear enough? 9 I will go farther and say I know that none of us 10 have ever seen him do anything that was deliberately 11 hurtful to her in any way, shape, or form. It may be 12 inappropriate and it may not match what was going on, but 13 I've never seen him be, you know, deliberately hurtful to 14 her. He's done inappropriate things, like he's called -- 15 oh, calling Susan, you know, names in front of her that 16 isn't the best choice at the moment, but wasn't meant to be 17 harmful to the child. 18 Q He's very caring about Teddy; isn't that correct? 19 A Right. Right. 20 Q Do you agree that at least part of 21 Mr. Coutsoukis' behavior stems from his concern about 22 Teddy? 23 A Oh, no doubt. 24 Q And do you agree that a family breakup is an 25 extremely stressful situation? 79 1 A Yes. 2 Q And do you agree that having a special needs 3 child, and that's how I'm calling Teddy, I don't know if 4 that's how you, in your profession -- 5 A Special needs is actually more appropriate than 6 handicapped these days. 7 Q And that that certainly is a stressful situation? 8 A That's what I was saying earlier, also, it's 9 extremely stressful. 10 Q And the parents have to go through a process to 11 learn to adapt to that unanticipated event? 12 A And we have a much higher rate of divorce among 13 our parents than parents in the general population, because 14 it is an extremely stressful situation to deal with -- to 15 deal with adjusting to a special needs child is a heavy 16 duty strain on a marriage. 17 Q Do you know whether or not the Coutsoukis' had 18 moved from, say California to Oregon? 19 A Where they came from? 20 Q Yes. 21 A Uhm, I remember talking about where they came 22 from in the beginning, I mean, they just had arrived; they 23 hadn't been here that long. I can't tell you, I thought 24 they came from back east. 25 Q Okay. But you had an impression that they had 80 1 not lived here in Oregon for a long period of time? 2 A Correct. 3 Q And that they had just moved from a place out of 4 the state, correct? 5 A They actually had been in Greece, I think, until 6 not too far -- I think they were, you know, my memory, 7 which could be faulty, was that they were in Greece; they, 8 uhm, came back to the states, they were maybe briefly on 9 the east coast, and then they landed here. 10 Q And you know that Mr. Coutsoukis was born and 11 raised in Greece, correct? 12 A Correct. 13 Q And he's living in what, from his prospective, is 14 a foreign country, meaning the United States of America? 15 A Correct. 16 Q And you recognize that that is a potential 17 stressor, as well, living in a foreign country, correct? 18 A Sure. 19 MS. SANZ: Objection as to relevance. 20 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 21 Q With all those stressors -- the breakup of the 22 family, the type of child that's involved here, the moving 23 around, the living in a foreign country -- can you 24 appreciate the amount of stress that Mr. Coutsoukis was 25 undergoing? 81 1 A And actually I thought I tried to say that 2 earlier when I was talking about my concern for his mental 3 health. Yes, I think he's under an enormous amount of 4 stress. 5 Q You're not saying that his behavior is a 6 permanent feature of his character, correct? 7 A The level of his behavior at the moment; I would 8 not see as a permanent feature. You know, we all have a 9 tendency, you know, he could have a tendency to be an 10 obsessive compulsive personality, but that not be extreme 11 until he's under a lot of stress. 12 Q And if those stressors are removed from his life, 13 then he would, most presumably, be someone who would not be 14 so objectionable to you, correct? I mean, don't you think 15 part of what was going on was he's trying to deal with all 16 these things that are falling apart with his life; and the 17 way he's trying to deal with it is, according to you, 18 having disagreements about American women, and displacing, 19 and all those other things? 20 A Yeah, his, his way of dealing with all those 21 stressors is maladaptive, which creates more stressors, 22 which makes the situation worse, so it is escalating. If 23 you're removing -- how can you remove a special needs child 24 as a stressor? I mean, that stress is there, it's not 25 going to go away. 82 1 Q Is it possible for a parent to learn to adapt to 2 a special needs child? 3 A Sure; the great majority of them do. 4 Q And once they adapt, the amount of stress that 5 they may previously have been undergoing will be therefore 6 minimized? 7 A Will be decreased, yeah. 8 Q So it's possible therefore that that stressor 9 will lose its importance in a person's life, or lose the 10 effect it was causing in that person's life, correct? 11 A If you handle it. I mean, that was the concern I 12 was trying to express earlier, was I don't see any evidence 13 of him working through that grief and working through those 14 stresses; he's stuck in it. 15 Q Do you think that banning him from the sessions 16 with his daughter and from Rogue Valley Medical Center, do 17 you think that compounded his problem or helped his 18 problem? 19 A Oh, I'm sure it compounded it. There is a limit 20 to abuse to others, though. 21 Q And so do you think that if he's permitted to 22 participate in his child's life, that that would ease the 23 frustration he experiences by not being able to participate 24 in it currently? 25 A No; because by participating in his child's life, 83 1 he has to have control of everything around it, and that's 2 not realistic. And as long as that conflict with realty 3 exists, the stress isn't going to go away. 4 Q This may be a chicken in the egg question, but 5 you don't know what Mr. Coutsoukis was like before you met 6 him in 1994, correct? 7 A No. I have asked, because I was concerned about 8 whether, when I, when I became somewhat more concerned for 9 my personal safety, it was of importance to me if this man 10 has always been like that or if he was escalating. And I 11 asked his wife, who said that, no, he has not always been 12 like that; he has always been an obsessive type of 13 personality that was real detailed and really into making 14 sure that things were done just right, but not to the 15 degree that he's been in the last several years. And then 16 over the last three that we have known him, we have seen a 17 distinct escalation. 18 Q You also mention that going through this process 19 is a process of grieving for a lost child. Now, isn't it 20 true that parents in this situation will have a different 21 way of managing their grief; isn't that true? 22 A Uh-huh. 23 Q And in your experience, some may become sad and 24 cry, like Susan Coutsoukis did? 25 A Uh-huh. 84 1 Q And others like Mr. Coutsoukis will want to point 2 the finger at you and you're an American woman; isn't that 3 true? 4 A Yeah, displacing it, right. 5 Q And that's a way of dealing with the situation, 6 correct? 7 A Correct. The difference in this situation is 8 that the three years, it has not improved, it has worsened; 9 and there doesn't seem to be a way to improve it because 10 improving requires change, and Photius has been resistant 11 to change. You have to take in new ideas and new 12 information and move on; and he's not been able to do that. 13 Q The last contact you had with him was in April of 14 1997; is that correct? 15 A Uhm, I, yes, I have not had any contact with him 16 since he moved back east. 17 Q So you -- 18 A He could have made some changes in the last four 19 months. 20 Q So you're basing your opinions and interpretation 21 of Mr. Coutsoukis based on your dealings that you had with 22 him between 1994 and 1997? 23 A Correct. 24 Q And your interpretations and opinions are based 25 on someone who is living in a foreign country, going 85 1 through a divorce, dealing with a stressful child, and 2 doing some moves, including, as you understand it, from the 3 east coast to here, and as you understand now, they've 4 moved back to the east coast, correct? That's -- you're 5 dealing with that kind of a person? 6 A Correct. Again, the stress is great, I would not 7 argue that at all. The level of reaction is abnormal, even 8 to the many stressors. And I know that's partly because 9 his pain is so great; I don't contest that at all. 10 Q Do you think that perhaps his level of reaction 11 was exacerbated by your decision to ban him from 12 participation in his child's life? 13 A I'm sure it was. We gave him much opportunity 14 before that, though, to make the change before we had to do 15 that. We didn't just come out of the air and say, okay, 16 you can't come anymore. 17 Q Right. And I want you to understand, Mrs. Kozol, 18 I'm not accusing you of that. 19 A Yes, and I understand that. And I'm 20 acknowledging that, yes, that -- actually I say yes, but I 21 don't know because it was so stressful for him that we 22 wouldn't do what he wanted us to do or that we wouldn't 23 agree to what he wanted to; I mean, that was a stressor. 24 At least when he didn't come, he wouldn't put up with that 25 stress; so he's trading off one stress for another. 86 1 Q With regard to a parent, doesn't the parent have 2 the ultimate say about what type of treatment his or her 3 child should receive? 4 A The parent does have the ultimate say; uhm, but 5 we had two parents, and we have always, that's what, in the 6 beginning with the letter that, you know, when I was saying 7 that he has -- every time a parent says, disagrees, and in 8 all therapeutic good conscious we have to do it this way; 9 if you don't like what we're doing, you certainly have a 10 right to push it. You can go to the state, you can file a 11 grievance against us, we will change. And I go out of my 12 way to make sure people know what the phone number is, what 13 the correct name is, etcetera. In this case, if both 14 parents had been saying we don't want you to touch our 15 child, you know, then the choice is we either can touch 16 your child or you need to go find service someplace else. 17 And that's always been an option. 18 Q And you understand from Mr. Coutsoukis' point of 19 view, you adopted Susan's decision and not his? 20 A Correct. 21 Q And you understand that from his point of view, 22 that that is not fair treatment? 23 A Because, because it's not his way? I, I don't, 24 you know, if it's not his way, it's not fair, yeah. 25 Q If that's your interpretation of his reason 87 1 for -- well, let me -- strike that. Is part of the reason 2 why you preferred Susan Coutsoukis' decision making over 3 Mr. Coutsoukis' decision making because you interpreted 4 Mr. Coutsoukis to be so compelled to always have his way? 5 A What we were concerned about was that a child get 6 appropriate care. Mr. Coutsoukis did not want to provide 7 appropriate care. It would be -- and what you're saying, 8 it would be like you going to the doctor and demanding that 9 he treat you one way and him telling you, no, as a 10 physician, he needs to treat you another; and you say, no, 11 I want it this way. Then what you're asking me is if you 12 don't get it, if the physician doesn't do what you want him 13 to do, then he's not being fair? It doesn't kind of, it 14 doesn't translate. 15 Q And one of the things you identified as being a 16 bone of contention was regarding these therapy balls? 17 A Uh-huh. 18 Q Are you aware of the fact that both Mr. and Mrs. 19 Coutsoukis had consulted with Dr. Skouteli, and I believe 20 that's S-k-o-u -- 21 A In Greece? 22 Q Yes. 23 A He said that happened. And we asked him for a 24 report along that line and we never got it. Uhm, see, we 25 have a physician prescription to provide therapy. And we 88 1 talked to the physician at great length; and when he first 2 became concerned about the balls, we made sure the 3 physician knew what we were doing and was comfortable with 4 it. He said he had this physician from Greece that had 5 some sort of statement about how therapy should be done, 6 but he never produced it. We never saw that report. When 7 we asked for it, then it was in Greek and we didn't receive 8 it. 9 Q Were you aware that Dr. Skouteli is a pediatric 10 neurologist? 11 A No. 12 Q Did I understand you to just say that the report 13 was in Greek? 14 A Well, when we asked for the report, he said that 15 it was in Greek. And, you know, we said, you know, if we 16 have not got something from this man that we can read, we 17 can't look and evaluate his recommendations of what he's 18 trying to tell us. 19 Q Are you aware that Dr. Skouteli is a woman? 20 A No, obviously. We have never received any 21 communication from Dr. Skouteli, either through Photius or 22 directly or in any other way. 23 Q Do you know whether or not Mr. Coutsoukis' 24 objection to the therapy balls was based on information he 25 had from Dr. Skouteli? 89 1 A I would have to venture that it was not, because 2 he complained to them long before he mentioned 3 Dr. Skouteli. 4 Q And I'm asking, though, if you ever had 5 discussions with Photius in which he told you it was 6 Dr. Skouteli's decision or recommendation that therapy 7 balls not been used? 8 A He told me, yes, he told me that that 9 recommendation had been made. But it, it counters all 10 medical knowledge that I have ever been aware of. I mean, 11 I can give you tons of information on why therapy balls are 12 used, they're used in every physical therapy office in the 13 United States. So the statement didn't make -- or anyone 14 that works with children anyway -- the statement didn't 15 make sense. And I couldn't get anything in writing to 16 support it. And this was a physician who apparently saw 17 the child in New York but puts a reports in Greek that 18 nobody can read, and he couldn't produce for me. So I 19 could not follow a recommendation that made no sense and 20 that had no support. 21 Q Did you attempt to contact, yourself, 22 Dr. Skouteli? 23 A I asked for the doctor's name, address, 24 information, how to write him, and did not get it. 25 Q Did you ask Mrs. Coutsoukis to provide that same 90 1 information? 2 A We were at an IFSP, I believe they were both at, 3 when he made that mention; and I addressed both of them, 4 that it would be very nice to have that information, we 5 would be glad to see it, we would be -- particularly also 6 because I have always been interested in what is the real 7 cause of what's wrong with Teddy. And I was very 8 interested in that report from that point of view, if that 9 physician had any light to shed on what might be a possible 10 diagnosis. I would like very much to have seen that 11 report. 12 Q If, assuming hypothetically Dr. Skouteli said no 13 therapy balls, would you have deferred to her opinion? 14 A No, because I had a physician telling me to do 15 it, and that was the treating physician, the primary 16 treating physician, and written a script and was backing 17 the therapy balls. I would have been very -- if the 18 person, if the physician had some reason, you know, that he 19 had found, or she had found, uhm, oh, a cyst in the 20 temporal lobe that was affecting the balance and there 21 might have been some bizarre reason why it wouldn't have 22 been good, I certainly would want to know about it. But if 23 it's a tie in direction, I would go with the primary 24 treating physician, who was Dr. Williams. 25 Q Do you know whether or not when Teddy did use the 91 1 therapy balls, if she fell off and bruised herself? 2 A Well, you don't -- she's not on the therapy ball 3 all by herself; she's got a therapist holding her. There 4 was one point where she fell off, there was a question on 5 whether she really bruised herself. You're only falling 18 6 inches, if you manage to fall off; and what you're doing is 7 you're wiggling out of the therapist's hands, you know. 8 Q So the answer to the question is do you know 9 whether or not -- 10 A I do know that there was an incident. 11 Q Did Mr. Coutsoukis learn about that incident? 12 A He -- oh, yes. 13 Q And did that upset him? 14 A I mean, he's the one that told me. Uhm, I'm sure 15 it did. The point -- it was not -- I know I keep 16 hesitating and probably driving you nuts, but it was not an 17 incident that really wasn't a reportable incident. It was 18 an incident to Photius, but we did not mean in any way to 19 try to hide it from him. 20 Q Another objectional thing was the use of his knee 21 pads when you wanted -- 22 A The orthotics. 23 Q -- the orthotics, correct? 24 A Correct. 25 Q And the objection that you had about the knee 92 1 pads is that they would not permit -- 2 A Knee flexion. 3 Q -- knee flexion. Were these soft pad knees, I 4 mean, soft types of pads? 5 A He would strap -- when you strap them at the top 6 and the bottom on a knee, you, they're soft but they don't 7 allow the movement on a three-year old, a skinny 8 three-year-old. You can then no longer bend your knees. 9 Q Did you observe that to be the case -- 10 A Yes. 11 Q -- that Teddy could not bend her knees with those 12 pads on? 13 MS. SANZ: You're shaking your head? 14 THE WITNESS: Yes, I'm sorry. 15 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 16 Q And do you know personally that it was 17 Mr. Coutsoukis that had put those on as opposed to a care 18 giver? 19 A I don't know who put them on her; they were put 20 on. He gave us direction to put them on. He wanted 21 everybody to put them on on a regular basis. Whether on 22 any particular day it was him that put them on, or a care 23 giver that put them on at his direction, I don't know. The 24 idea was his. 25 Q Do you know whether or not his idea stemmed from 93 1 his consultation with Dr. Skouteli? 2 A I've never seen that report, so how would I -- 3 no, I don't have that knowledge at all. That would be most 4 peculiar, again. 5 Q Was Mr. Coutsoukis' intention to help prevent 6 Teddy from bruising herself when she fell? 7 A I'm sure his intentions were good. We tried to 8 explain to him why they were not safe and counter to 9 therapeutic gains, but he knew what was best, you know, 10 according to him. 11 Q Did she fall and bruise herself when she was 12 wearing the orthotics? 13 A She falls and bruises herself all the time. She 14 doesn't have a good sense of balance; I'm sure it's, you 15 know, it's gradually improving, but it's improving at a 16 slow rate. She falls much more than the average child. 17 She also does not have a good sense of proprioception, 18 that's a sense of where your body is in space; and that 19 contributes to some of her falling. It's like you don't 20 know where your body is. We would put weighted vests on 21 her, for instance, to help her have an increased sense of 22 where her trunk was; and he did not like that at all, 23 either. 24 Q And another bone of contention was, for example, 25 Mr. Coutsoukis not wanting his daughter to be examined in 94 1 the vaginal area, is that -- you got a phone call from, I 2 assume, Medford Clinic about that incident? 3 A And all they asked was, you know, was there a way 4 to work with this man better. So I don't know the specific 5 details on what was wrong with her, that's not appropriate. 6 Q So you don't know whether or not Teddy was 7 protesting, correct? 8 A No. I -- what they said was that, you know, he 9 was protesting, he was very upset. I don't believe from 10 the conversation that we got that they ever got a chance to 11 touch her for her to protest. 12 Q And you don't know whether or not the type of 13 examination would have caused Teddy's stress, correct? In 14 other words, if they would have had to put an instrument in 15 her vagina? 16 A I have no idea what they intended. All I know is 17 that they were kind of at a loss on how to work with 18 Mr. Coutsoukis. 19 Q Did they give you any explanation about why 20 Mr. Coutsoukis objected? 21 A No. I mean, it wasn't -- I didn't feel that it 22 was appropriate for me to ask questions about a situation 23 that, you know, I wasn't involved in. It's a medical 24 confidentiality thing; I wouldn't ask. 25 Q With the evaluations you have done of Teddy, have 95 1 any of them included measuring her self-esteem? 2 A You -- there aren't tests that can measure a 3 child's, a non verbal three-year-old's self-esteem; you can 4 only do it by observation. 5 Q So the answer to my question is no, there have 6 been no evaluations? 7 A Right, because they're not possible. 8 Q Have there been any observations made of her 9 self-esteem? 10 A We do social evaluations and they have 11 self-esteem type questions in them. So a child's social 12 age, uhm, part of that is how you are aware of yourself and 13 how you fit in society. And so there will be questions 14 about does the child like to be the center of attention, 15 and will the child protest, you know, when things are taken 16 away. And those are measures of self, you know, a child 17 with no self-esteem won't. Uhm, so that's, I think, the 18 closest you can get. And yes, we did those kinds of tests 19 regularly. 20 Q And did you do them of Teddy? 21 A Yes. 22 Q And was there any indication that she's suffering 23 from low self-esteem? 24 A Not on a test. I mean, the being upset when her 25 parents were fighting, you know, was a sadness that I think 96 1 is typical of most kids when their parents are fighting. 2 Uhm, not, that's, it's a complex question because there are 3 social immaturities, uhm, like not, not really being aware 4 of, or approaching your peers a lot, is that -- so that 5 when you put her with other children, she seems happy 6 enough, but she doesn't know how to play with other 7 children. Is that because she's unsure of herself, or is 8 that because she's really lacking some skills because of 9 her complicated development; that's a real hard one to 10 answer. 11 Q So isn't it fair to say, then, that you're 12 speculating when you make a statement that what 13 Mr. Coutsoukis says affects Teddy's self-esteem? 14 A What I said was that if she continued in that 15 model as, you know, this is a man that says, you know, 16 women are no good, American women are no good, and does not 17 allow Teddy the opportunity to initiate activities, uhm, 18 you know, he reads what's happening, he makes up his mind 19 on what's happening, so she has no ability to explore -- I 20 wish I could say this more eloquently -- uhm, if she has 21 no, is not allowed the room to develop her own person and 22 her own likes and dislikes, if she is told how she feels 23 about things, then she can't come up with a normal 24 self-esteem. 25 Q Are you assuming that Teddy would have the 97 1 cognitive ability to develop her own identity of herself? 2 A Oh, yes. 3 Q So you don't know whether or not cognitively -- 4 A She is cognitively impaired, but she has some 5 very bright capabilities. It's more, it is a big concern 6 to me that she is like a significantly learning disabled 7 youngster more than a significantly retarded youngster. 8 Like on the testing I did, she'll score out at a retarded 9 level; but when you look at the sub scores, some of them 10 are age level and some of the responses that parents, 11 responses that she has learned are inappropriate on a test. 12 An example of, like when I was testing her and I 13 would give her things to match, she would look at me and 14 wait for me to tell her what to do. She didn't get the 15 game of the matching things. All games are mom wants me to 16 do, dad wants me to do something, I have to learn what they 17 want me to do and then I'll do it. A self initiated 18 matching kind of thing was totally foreign to her. 19 So she, you know, where we played another game 20 and I played some, and she finally got it, and she could do 21 everything on there at age level. Some other ones that she 22 could do very remedially. So she has distinct inherent 23 cognitive difficulty. She also has learned to do sort of a 24 parrot rote response game that she's played to make her 25 parents happy. And she's very limited in her ability to 98 1 initiate learning because she's not been given appropriate 2 opportunity by either parent, because Susan didn't really 3 understand that either. And she has some difficulties. 4 Just, you ask me simple questions and I give you 5 awful complicated answers, I'm sorry. But definitely she 6 has the cognitive ability to have her own self-esteem and 7 will, whether it's good or bad. You can be pretty 8 significantly retarded and have self-esteem, whether it's 9 good or bad. 10 Q In terms of what have been Mr. Coutsoukis' 11 comments and indications about lacking respect for American 12 women, you can't say whether she'll understand cognitively 13 what that means? 14 A I would expect that she will, I don't -- 15 Q But can you say today that she would, based on 16 what you know of her, of her current situation? 17 A The question is will she understand his current 18 opinion of American women? Eventually, you know, if she 19 was a teenager now and he still had the same kinds of 20 opinions of American women, would she understand that and 21 be affected by it, is that what you're asking me? 22 Q No, I'm saying based on what you know now of 23 Teddy, you can't -- you can strike that. You would, you 24 can only speculate about whether, let's say for example 25 when she's a teenager, if dad's comments about American 99 1 women would affect her self-esteem? 2 A I would put salary on it. You can't give -- I'm 3 not the lawyer; but to me, you can't give 100 percent black 4 and white answer on something that's going to happen ten 5 years down the road; nobody can. None of us are that 6 brilliant, but I would sure put money on it. 7 Q Likewise you can't say because of Teddy and not 8 knowing her full cognitive abilities, particularly since 9 you're indicating she has problems interpreting language, 10 right? 11 A Understanding it. Interpreting it is a little 12 different word. Yeah, understanding it. 13 Q Understanding language that Mr. Coutsoukis' 14 comments about American women, that she'll understand what 15 that means and that she'll understand it's a criticism and 16 it's a criticism that effects her? I mean, that takes a 17 lot of cognitive ability to reach the point where she can 18 conclude, hey, this is really an insult to me and it 19 affects my self-esteem? 20 A If you figure that at three years old, her 21 overall cognitive skills were roughly 15, 18-month-old 22 level, that she's, you know, overall, overly simplified, 23 she's working with half her IQ points. So when she's 14, 24 she has the overall cognitive ability of a 25 seven-year-old -- and that's way oversimplified -- and any 100 1 seven-year-old can understand a slam like that. 2 Q But you don't know how far she'll develop, 3 correct? 4 A Correct. There's no reason to think that she 5 won't continue to develop. And in fact, we're quite 6 hopeful that she's going to. I, while I'm relatively 7 certain that she will never be a, quote unquote, normal 8 child, she has the potential for being awfully close. 9 Q Now, I think a fourth area where you pointed out 10 Mr. Coutsoukis had problems with the treatment Teddy was 11 receiving was in relation to Mr. Miller, correct, where 12 Mr. Coutsoukis allegedly threatened to punch out 13 Mr. Miller? 14 A Wanted to take him out back and punch him out, 15 duke it out. 16 Q Now, that information you received as hearsay, I 17 assume, from Mr. Miller? 18 A Yeah. And that actually, when I was going back 19 looking at the other records, was we, we did not have a PT 20 that worked with her before David. We assigned David right 21 off because we expected that Photius would be more 22 comfortable with a man because those problems were evident 23 from the beginning. David, you know, went, at that point 24 said, you know, the man is not happy with me, I'm not able 25 to work with him, you know, he's wanting, offering to punch 101 1 me out, settle things; maybe we need to look at another 2 therapist just because I don't think I'm effective. And 3 that's when we traded off. 4 Q Do you have any knowledge how Teddy was 5 responding to Mr. Miller's treatment, whether or not Teddy 6 would cry and be hysterical, or whether she would laugh and 7 want to be with Mr. Miller; do you have any knowledge about 8 that? 9 A I can go and look specifically, you know, I have 10 all the chart notes, again, here. Uhm, that was early on, 11 so I do remember that there was very little handling by 12 David because that was when, that was in the beginning when 13 Mr. Coutsoukis didn't want us touching the child. 14 Q Do you know if the reason why Mr. Coutsoukis 15 didn't want you folks touching the child is because Teddy 16 might react hysterically if you did touch her? 17 A I have never seen Teddy react hysterically. She 18 was upset, I mean, one, I have co-therapized with David on 19 many occasions, I know what he works like, and I have been 20 around Teddy when she was upset, cranky upset, tired, have 21 a cold cranky kind of thing. I don't have any knowledge of 22 her ever being hysterical at any time. 23 Q And likewise, do you have any knowledge about her 24 being upset? 25 A Cranky cold upset, you know, typical two-year-old 102 1 I'm tired, I don't feel good, I want to go home. And 2 that's, we have several documentations of that, you know, 3 Teddy had a bad day, had a cold, seemed tired, didn't want 4 to play. We chart that. 5 Q So then my question is do you know if 6 Mr. Coutsoukis' reason for why he didn't want you folks to 7 handle Teddy was because Teddy might get upset? 8 A That wouldn't surprise me. But children get 9 upset when you go to the doctor; that doesn't mean you quit 10 taking them. 11 Q Do you know whether or not Mr. Coutsoukis asked 12 that Mr. Miller not treat Teddy? 13 A I don't have a memory of that; it doesn't 14 necessarily mean that it didn't happen. Again, we can 15 check the notes if that's important. I do know that we 16 agreed that another therapist might work better. 17 Q Meaning you and Mr. Coutsoukis agreed, or -- 18 A David Miller and I agreed. 19 Q In the conversation you had with Mr. Miller, his 20 information about Mr. Coutsoukis saying let's go back out, 21 let's go out in the back and settle this, or something to 22 that effect, Mr. Miller was describing that as being 23 indicative of the relationship not working out, correct? 24 A Uh-huh. 25 Q Mr. Miller did not immediately call you up after 103 1 Mr. Coutsoukis allegedly made those comments, correct? 2 A No, I think he called me the next day, let's 3 meet, this isn't working, maybe we need to reassign. 4 Q You have no knowledge whether -- 5 A And he wasn't afraid or over concerned or 6 anything, at that time. 7 Q Okay. He also never called the police, correct? 8 A No. David is much bigger than Photius, and I 9 don't think that David was seriously concerned. It was 10 nothing to be fearful about, it was just an indication of 11 inappropriateness in a relationship not working. 12 Q Now, with regard to Dr. Oas' report, you note in 13 there that Mrs. Coutsoukis admits that she denies 14 Mr. Coutsoukis access to Teddy; did you read that in the 15 report? It's on page three at the bottom. 16 A Yeah, our statement was that we didn't bring 17 her -- 18 MS. SANZ: Wait. Before you begin, Counsel, 19 what specifically are you relying on? 20 MS. LORI: She states her reason for denying 21 Mr. Coutsoukis access to Teddy. 22 MS. SANZ: Well, I'm sorry, bottom of the 23 page? 24 MS. LORI: Uh-huh. Last sentence. 25 THE WITNESS: Isn't that worded as now, I 104 1 mean, that's the whole purpose of the custody thing is 2 that now she is restricting access? I mean, that's, 3 that's a present tense? Will thrive better -- "She 4 states her reason for denying Mr. Coutsoukis access to 5 Teddy is that Teddy will thrive better in a social 6 milieu with a network of caretakers, educators and 7 therapists." 8 MS. SANZ: I'm going to object, anyway, you 9 know, Ms. Kozol was not present at that time, so she 10 has no basis of knowledge of what transpired between 11 Mrs. Coutsoukis and Dr. Oas. 12 MS. LORI: Well, Mrs. Kozol did indicate 13 that she thought Susan was not denying access, and I 14 think I'm entitled to -- 15 THE WITNESS: I think what I was trying to 16 say was that we had no knowledge of -- that we only 17 had the child a few hours a week, and that you 18 wouldn't have needed to deny access to Photius in 19 order to provide our service. It's not an either or; 20 so it wouldn't be, no, Photius you can't see this 21 child because she needs to go to child development, 22 like it's a day long program. 23 MS. LORI: Now, isn't it true that you 24 really don't know what Teddy thinks, correct? 25 MS. SANZ: Objection as to relevance. 105 1 THE WITNESS: Well, and nobody knows what 2 anybody else thinks. 3 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 4 Q And so for you to say what Mr. Coutsoukis says 5 he thinks Teddy thinks, you can't necessarily say that 6 Mr. Coutsoukis is wrong because you don't know what Teddy 7 thinks, correct? 8 A Well, he'll make comments that, uhm -- and this 9 may be something in court next week that you might want to 10 use specific examples on -- I mean, he would make a comment 11 on what she's thinking that is beyond her social, cognitive 12 maturity to think. 13 Q Can you give a specific example? 14 A I wish I could remember the thing about why she 15 was mouthing things before. Uhm, I've heard so -- the only 16 clear example I personally have is watching him load her in 17 the car and the whole routine as being inappropriate. I 18 know that we have several instances that could be provided 19 next week by other staff; I hate to quote them and not get 20 it accurately. 21 Q And one of the things you indicated is that 22 Mr. Coutsoukis settled for less than best care, correct, in 23 your opinion? 24 A In my opinion, right. 25 Q But you don't know whether or not his idea of how 106 1 Teddy should be treated came from Dr. Skouteli, correct? 2 A I have never in my life met a physician, a 3 pediatric neurologist who has extensive child development 4 background and knowledge, to give advice on those types of 5 things. It's usually not a physician level type of thing. 6 Q You mean a pediatric neurologist would not give 7 advice about whether or not Teddy should use a therapy 8 ball? 9 A The only way I can conceive of them no using a 10 therapy ball was if there was some bizarre important piece 11 of information that they didn't get to us. But usually 12 physicians, when it comes to whether or not a child should 13 use an orthotic or use a therapy ball or be in a parent 14 toddler group, those decisions are usually left to the 15 therapist because physicians don't necessarily involve 16 themselves at that level. They're physicians and they're 17 not necessarily that tuned in to smaller child development 18 type things; smaller details, I guess. 19 Q Is it fair to say that if Mr. Coutsoukis is 20 consulting a pediatric neurologist and basing his decisions 21 on those consultations, that -- 22 A Why didn't he share them with us? 23 Q And then my question for you is perhaps, and I 24 don't want to get into answering your questions, but 25 wouldn't you agree that one major problem that occurred in 107 1 this situation is there were problems communicating? 2 A I know we repeatedly, we repeatedly asked him for 3 information from that physician. And if we've got a 4 gentleman who is very, very single-minded and determined 5 that things should be his way and he quotes a physician, 6 and this physician is practicing in New York, but cannot 7 give us a report in English? 8 Q Okay. Do you know -- 9 A It just didn't seem like it stacked up well; it 10 wasn't something I could trust. 11 Q Are you for certain that Mr. Coutsoukis told you 12 Dr. Skouteli was practicing in New York? 13 A He took the child to New York to see this 14 physician, and then couldn't provide us with a report. 15 Q Do you have any information whether Dr. Skouteli 16 practices in the country of Greece, not New York, in the 17 State of New York? 18 A She may well practice in Greece, but she saw this 19 child in New York. And Greece may very well be the primary 20 practice. 21 Q Is there any possibility that in any of the 22 opinions you have given here today, that there's a 23 possibility that somehow you might be in error? 24 A Oh, for sure. I don't know, I guess for sure is 25 not a good legal response, but I have never, ever claimed 108 1 to be perfect, never make a mistake; I should be so lucky, 2 especially when it comes to exact dates or an instance like 3 that. I think I have a fair amount of confidence in my 4 medical opinions of her abilities, her future, her 5 strengths, and my concerns about Photius. Sure, I can be 6 wrong, anyone can be wrong; and I certainly can be wrong on 7 details. But I tried; I read up. 8 Q I don't have any other questions. Photius, do 9 you need to talk to me, or -- 10 MR. COUTSOUKIS: Yes. Can we take a break? 11 MS. LORI: Sure. Can we go off record? 12 (A recess was then taken.) 13 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 14 Q Back on record. Mrs. Coutsoukis -- Kozol, do you 15 have an estimate of how many hours you personally spent 16 with Mr. Coutsoukis and Teddy together? 17 A Most of my time has been with Mr. Coutsoukis 18 because I have not been a treating therapist to Teddy. I 19 did some testing on Teddy. Most of the time that I have 20 been with Photius and Teddy together, it's been in the 21 background, like I was saying earlier when she would come 22 in for therapy and I would hang around out the door, sort 23 of eavesdrop, listening in to make sure that things were 24 going okay. So not a lot. Uhm -- 25 Q What about just you -- 109 1 A Ten or 12, maybe. 2 Q Ten to 12 hours total? 3 A Uh-huh, I'm guessing. 4 Q Okay. That's over the '94 to '97 time period? 5 A Right. 6 Q What about total hours with just Mr. Coutsoukis 7 personally? 8 MS. SANZ: Counsel, does that include all 9 communication, or face to face? 10 MS. LORI: Face to face. 11 THE WITNESS: Most of our conversations have 12 been on the phone at some length; or Mr. Coutsoukis is 13 quite proficient with the fax machine, he sends me 14 lots, or sent me lots of faxes. 15 BY MS. LORI: (Continuing) 16 Q So just on a face to face basis, how many hours 17 would that have totaled? 18 A We did our IFSP's that I -- that's -- 19 Q Was it less than the ten to 12 hours you spent 20 with Mr. Coutsoukis and Teddy? 21 A No, I wouldn't think so. Because we've had, uhm, 22 it's kind of hard because like the last IFSP meeting we had 23 was four or five hours long, but it was by telephone again 24 because, uhm, we had had to ban him from those, from the 25 hospital and from the meetings. So face to face with him, 110 1 it's probably maybe the same amount, maybe less. Actual 2 conversations, though, would be many, many hours. 3 Q I don't have any other questions. 4 5 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 6 BY MS. SANZ: 7 Q How involved have you been, in the scope of your 8 responsibilities, involved with this case of Teddy 9 Coutsoukis? 10 A I'm sure hundreds of hours. Primarily, uhm, 11 trying, in the beginning, really trying to make all the 12 players happy, including the parents, to be able to meet 13 his needs. We really thought originally that if we start 14 out where who he is at and educate him and bring him along, 15 uhm, things will go fine. So we didn't touch the child, 16 and explained to him why we wanted to. Uhm, all of the 17 therapists have been uncomfortable a lot of time, not just, 18 you know, Shirley Steinson, all of the staff, the family 19 consultants, etcetera, have been stuck, have really 20 wrestled with how much does one personally put up with in 21 order to serve a child. Because we're, our duty is to do 22 the best service that we can for Teddy. 23 MS. LORI: Can I just object on non 24 responsiveness. 25 111 1 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 2 Q You answered it, you actually have spent an 3 enormous amount of time assisting this family? 4 A Right, or the staff serving the family, 5 attempting to serve the family. 6 Q IFSP meeting, what does that stand for? 7 A I'm sorry, Individual Family Service Plan. By 8 law and by philosophy, every year we sit down as a team, as 9 a group, the parent, the therapist, the family consultant, 10 the teacher, whoever has been working with the child, and 11 look at how the child has progressed over the last year, 12 you know, what she's made gains in, and identify what is, 13 what are appropriate goals for the coming year. That we 14 want her to be, you know, an example would be Teddy will 15 use two word combinations to indicate needs; that's a real 16 appropriate goal for her. And then we would, we would just 17 sit and talk and write all of those goals. We want her to 18 be able to talk, we want her to be able to walk up and down 19 stairs, you know, whatever. 20 And when we list all the goals that we want to 21 work on, we being the entire time, then we go back and 22 assign, okay, who is going to do, work on those goals, 23 who's going to be responsible for them, how much service 24 are we providing, etcetera. That happens once a year. And 25 then every six months, we're required to legally to sit 112 1 down and on paper go over those goals and progress. 2 Q And in you're dealings with the kind of service 3 you provided for Teddy and her parents, was Dr. Williams 4 made aware, and if so, how often would she be made aware of 5 your evaluations? 6 A She received copies of everything, the IFSP, the 7 therapist report in conjunction with this meeting. Before 8 that meeting happened, we do evaluations so we can go into 9 that Individual Family Service Plan with accurate 10 information of progress. Those evaluations are sent to 11 Diane -- Dr. Williams. And then the mid year, we do 12 reports to her on how they're doing. And then I, you know, 13 I would have conversations like when the balls were an 14 issue with her to see if she had any problem with them and 15 explained why we were using them, but -- 16 Q Do you know whether Dr. Williams -- you don't 17 actually know whether Dr. Williams was aware of 18 Dr. Skouteli's involvement in depth or not? 19 A No, I don't. 20 Q What training have you received in terms of 21 dealing with people who are under the stress, the grieving 22 and the anger issues that tend to come up? 23 A There is a lot of general training. To me, it 24 was, I always felt like it was an opportunity for me 25 personally to use my psychiatry experience, because these 113 1 parents are in a very difficult space, and to be able to 2 use some good counseling technique to support them is 3 valuable. But all of my staff have had training in working 4 with parents in the grief process, uhm -- 5 Q When you talked about the stress of the breakup 6 of the family, moving from a new metropolitan, new city to 7 another, and special needs of the child, would you say that 8 Susan was also under a lot of stress? 9 A Sure. 10 Q Susan Coutsoukis, of the same kind as 11 Mr. Coutsoukis? 12 A Sure. They were both under stress, and that was 13 obvious to her, too. It was very painful for her to accept 14 the extent, I mean, she would cry, she would get tearful, 15 she would ask questions. To watch a parent get up the 16 nerve to ask those hard questions about what do you think 17 she'll be like when she's five or six, you can see it's a 18 painful process for both of them. 19 Q You recognize, or you acknowledge that 20 Mr. Coutsoukis deeply cares for Teddy, but still you 21 recommend supervised visitation? 22 A Correct. With -- I would expect that if it was 23 supervised, that there would be some responsibility of the 24 supervisor to make sure that it maintained a positive 25 environment. 114 1 Q Why do you feel that she needs, Teddy needs the 2 extra protection that it be supervised? 3 A To ideally, you know, if it was supervised and if 4 he got into sort of a ranting kind of thing like he does 5 about being upset about one thing or the other, that that 6 could be stopped or terminated. And it, you know, I have 7 seen him be very tender and very caring with her; and, you 8 know, if he's in that space, that's fine. 9 Q But you have also seen him be inappropriately 10 angry when she's around? 11 A Yeah. And maybe its somebody else, but in front 12 of her. And that could be restricted. 13 Q And the level of anger and what you called the 14 level of behavior, is how you termed it when you were under 15 cross examination, this level of anger and behavior, that 16 this has been ongoing at least since 1994 when you dealt 17 with him? 18 A In a distinctly escalating manner. 19 Q When you decided to, you know, when the hospital 20 actually decided to have Mr. Coutsoukis persona non gratis, 21 what were the factors that you were considering in terms of 22 protection and what led to that? 23 MS. LORI: Well, objection. I mean, this is 24 asked and answered; we've gone over this. This is 25 improper rebuttal. I think the record speaks for 115 1 itself on that. 2 MS. SANZ: I think you asked whether it was, 3 you know, you went over that again on cross, and I 4 want to make sure that we have it in context. 5 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 6 Q Were you considering Teddy? 7 A That, we were definitely considering Teddy in 8 that it took us so long to come to that decision. 9 Q Were you also considering staff members as well 10 as other patients that you were serving? 11 A Correct. And other families. 12 Q When you reviewed Shirley Steinson's report of 13 her going to the home, do you know whether you reviewed all 14 the records, all her reports? 15 A No. As you can see, there's quite a thick file 16 here. Uhm, I wouldn't -- you would have to give me the 17 date. I have, I can say that I have never recollected her 18 saying that he was doing anything deliberately harmful to 19 her in any way, shape, or form; again, using poor judgment 20 in some things. But I am sure if he had done something -- 21 the only instance of deliberate possible harm ever 22 mentioned was when he sat her in front of the car -- 23 MS. LORI: Objection as to lack of personal 24 knowledge. 25 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 116 1 Q Do you know of an event that put Teddy in some 2 danger, something to that effect? 3 A Correct, that he -- 4 MS. LORI: And again, I'm going to object, 5 not only on lack of personal knowledge, but also on 6 relevancy. 7 BY MS. SANZ: (Continuing) 8 Q I think it's relevant. Go ahead and answer, 9 briefly. 10 A Okay. He -- I had mentioned earlier that we had 11 trouble when we had these sessions at the end of the day 12 getting him to stop or to basically shut up. And one of 13 the therapists could not shut him up, or stop him, and she 14 simply said the session is over, and walked out. And he 15 followed her out and was talking at her. And she was 16 attempting to leave, and he sat Teddy down -- that was 17 before Teddy could walk -- he sat Teddy down in front of 18 her car to keep her from leaving. 19 Q And this was reported to you again? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Now, there was, one of my last questions is you 22 feel that he intends to do the best thing for Teddy? 23 A Yes, I do, I believe that. 24 Q To participate in therapy, correct? 25 A I believe that. 117 1 Q But the outcome tends to be, the end result and 2 how he behaves and how he deals with you or Teddy or the 3 staff tends to be dictatorial? 4 A Correct. 5 Q Thank you. 6 7 RECROSS EXAMINATION 8 BY MS. LORI: 9 Q With regards to the parking lot incident, you 10 didn't see it, correct? 11 A Correct. 12 Q And it was reported to you second or third hand, 13 correct? 14 A By the therapist that was involved, in tears, who 15 wanted not to work with this family anymore. 16 Q You have no evidence that Mr. Coutsoukis has been 17 violent or angry or any way hostile to Teddy, correct? 18 A Correct. I've never said that he was hostile to 19 Teddy, just that he was inappropriate toward her. 20 Q And likewise, he's never been angry towards 21 Teddy, correct? 22 A Not to my knowledge. 23 Q With regard to the home study, if Mrs. Steinson 24 had found something amiss, she would have brought it to 25 your attention, correct? 118 1 A Yes. I actually started to say that earlier. 2 I'm sure that if there's been something wrong, she would 3 have said something. 4 Q I have no further questions. 5 MS. SANZ: No further questions. 6 7 (The deposition of Ms. Kozol was then 8 concluded at 4:50 p.m.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 119 1 CERTIFICATE 2 3 STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. 4 County of Jackson ) 5 6 I, Debra J. Dugan, a Registered Professional Reporter 7 and Certified Shorthand Reporter for Oregon, do hereby 8 certify that, pursuant to the stipulation of counsel for 9 the respective parties hereinbefore set forth, BARBARA LYNN 10 KOZOL personally appeared before me at the time and place 11 mentioned in the caption herein; that at said time and 12 place I reported in Stenotype all testimony adduced and 13 other oral proceedings had in the foregoing manner; that 14 thereafter my notes were reduced to typewriting under my 15 direction, and that the foregoing transcript, pages 1 to 16 118, both inclusive, constitutes a full, true, and accurate 17 record of all such testimony adduced and oral proceedings 18 had, and of the whole thereof. 19 WITNESS MY HAND AND CSR STAMP at Medford, Oregon, this 20 10th day of September, 1997. 21 22 23 _____________________________ 24 Debra J. Dugan, RPR, CSR Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 CSR No. 90-0095