United States District Court, D. Connecticut
Page 354
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 355
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 356
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 357
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 358
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 359
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 360
John
R. Williams, Rose Longo-McLean, John R. Williams &
Associates, LLC, New Haven, CT, for Scott Powell.
Jill
Jones-Soderman, New York, NY, pro se.
David
Keeler Ludwig, Thomas K. Hedemann, Axinn, Veltrop &
Harkrider LLP, Hartford, CT, Joseph S. Dey, III, Dey Smith
Steele, LLC, Milford, CT, for Jill Jones-Soderman.
MEMORANDUM
OF DECISION
Robert
M. Spector, United States Magistrate Judge.
The
plaintiff, Scott Powell, commenced this action against
defendants Jill Jones-Soderman[1] and the Foundation for
the Child Victims of the Family Courts ["FCVFC"]
alleging that Jones-Soderman posted statements on a public
website falsely accusing him of physically and sexually
abusing his children. Powell asserts claims for defamation
per se, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction
of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional
distress. (Doc. No. 1, ¶¶ 9-12). On December 22,
2017, United States District Judge Michael P. Shea dismissed
FCVFC from this case.[2] On April 15, 2019, the Court (Shea,
J.), denied Jones-Soderman's Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings (Doc. No. 43), and four days later, the parties
consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate
Judge. (Doc. No. 44). The case was transferred to Magistrate
Judge Donna F. Martinez (id.), and then reassigned
to the undersigned on June 20, 2019. (Doc. No. 49). Following
a Joint Stipulation to Waive Jury Trial (Doc. No. 70),
Page 361
this case was tried to the Court on October 21-23, 2019.
(Doc. Nos. 92, 94-96). Scott Powell, Jill Jones-Soderman,
Cynthia Diehl and Rick Diehl testified. On October 21, 2019,
Jones-Soderman filed a Motion for Judgment on Partial
Findings. (Doc. No. 91).[3]
For the
reasons set forth below, the defendant's Motion for
Judgment on Partial Findings (Doc. No. 91) is DENIED.
Judgment shall enter in favor of the plaintiff in the amount
of $100,000.
I.
FACTUAL FINDINGS
In
their Joint Trial Memorandum, filed on July 12, 2019, the
parties stipulated to the following uncontroverted facts:
Jill
Jones-Soderman is the founder and director of the FCVFC.
(Doc. 1 ¶ 4). The following words/phrases appeared on
the website of the FCVFC:
1. Living with Powell is "a death sentence" for
his children;
2. Powell is a "vicious abuser" of his children;
3. Powell is an "accused child abuser";
4. Powell's good reputation in his community is
"based on the reluctance of those too fearful to take
on the rage and intimidation to report him for crimes for
which he should have been reported";
5. Powell, on an ongoing basis, "hits the buttocks of
his younger daughter," and is "grabbing/patting
[her] buttocks" and the breasts of his older daughter;
6. Evidence of sexual assaults being committed by Powell
upon his minor daughters "are now on camera ...";
7. Powell is "an accused child sexual abuser [who has
been elevated] to the position of teacher in a program
alerting parents to sexual abuse in the camp program, where
he has been a long time camp Director at Woodway Country
Club, in Darien, Connecticut. This camp Director has an
institutional history, though undisclosed, of inappropriate
behavior with teenage girls and children. He no longer
works as a teacher, but rather as a carpenter in his own
business";
8. Powell has "threatened and intimidated" his
daughters;
9. Powell is comparable to other prominent child abusers
and "the accused abuser, Scott Powell will not be
allowed to languish under the veil of secrecy. He has
forcibly, through threats, intimidation ... been able to
hide in plain sight. We expect that Scott Powell's
reign of terror over his children ... will not be allowed
to prevail...";
10. One of Powell's minor daughters (whose name was
published) "was the major target of Scott Powell's
aggressive abuse" while the other minor daughter
(whose name was also published) "was the target of
Scott Powell's most aggressive sexual incursions."
Based
on the entire record developed during trial, comprised of
credible testimony and admitted exhibits, the following
constitutes the Court's findings of fact pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a)(1):
Jill
Jones-Soderman is a psychiatric social worker and a
psychoanalyst by training. She received her Masters'
degree in Social Work from Hunter College and did her
training at New York University.
Page 362
Jones-Soderman, however, has not been licensed in any State
since 2010. Accordingly, she was not licensed at the time of
her involvement in the issues in this case.
Jones-Soderman
described herself as the Founder and the Executive Director
of the FCVFC. According to Jones-Soderman, the FCVFC serves
clients who are involved in custody matters in which a
protective parent is facing false allegations that lead to a
child being transferred to the hands of an abusive parent.
The FCVFC became a non-profit in 2008, and Jones-Soderman
does not receive a salary as the Director. In her role, she
performs forensic and analytic evaluations, conducts family
interviews, and reviews school records, documents available
under the Freedom of Information Act, and the court history
of a case. She described her practice as focusing on
"highly disturbed patients" who are actively
suicidal and suffer from acute psychiatric disorders. The
FCVFC pays for her office and for accommodations, and she
receives some income from Social Security and from her work
as a private consultant and an expert witness.
Jones-Soderman
testified that Jane and Scott Powell were divorced in 2008
following "serious domestic violence allegations and
serious allegations of sexual abuse" of their minor
children, C.P. and E.P. Jones-Soderman added,
"Nevertheless, they had a 50/50 custody arrangement and
[Mrs. Powell] gave [Powell] a key to her house so he could
see the children and so he could have easy access to
them."[4]
In
2011, the case was referred to the Department of Children of
Families ["DCF"]; Dr. Eric Frazier served as an
expert evaluator. (See Pl. Ex. 15). Jones-Soderman
explained that Dr. Frazier "was not court appointed, but
agreed upon, after referral from [Scott]
Powell's attorney." According to Jones-Soderman, DCF
investigated the claims of abuse and felt that, if C.P. and
E.P. were in treatment, such treatment would
"clarify" whether the children were victims of
sexual abuse. Following these juvenile court proceedings in
which DCF was involved, the court ordered a change in the
custody arrangement such that Jane Powell, not Scott
Powell, was limited to brief, supervised meetings with
the children.
Approximately
four years later, in July 2015, Mrs. Powell contacted
Jones-Soderman to request an evaluation of her case so that
she could try to regain custody of C.P. and E.P., then-ages
13 and 15, who were still in the sole custody of their
father, Scott Powell. Mrs. Powell engaged Jones-Soderman
through a memorandum of understanding, and Mrs. Powell paid
her $3,500.00 as a retainer, and an additional $3,500.00 for
her work on her case. In connection with assisting Mrs.
Powell, Jones-Soderman reviewed the court records and
familiarized herself with the history and "context of
the case."
In
addition to engaging Jones-Soderman, Mrs. Powell retained
Attorney Alex Schwartz to modify the custody arrangement.
Jones-Soderman spoke to Attorney Schwartz in 2015 and
explained her plan to do a critique of the evaluator and to
obtain her own experts, which she did.
Then,
on March 16, 2016, eight months after Jones-Soderman began
working with Mrs. Powell, C.P. and E.P. sent Jones-Soderman
letters (Def. Exs. B-C) and a video statement. (Def. Ex. A).
The children called Jones-Soderman the next day, on
Page 363
March 17, 2016, and relayed their fears of their father.
According to Jones-Soderman, they told her that if she did
not help them by that weekend, they planned to kill
themselves. Jones-Soderman described the phone call as a
three-hour "forensic evaluation" in which she
solicited "very specific," "detailed"
information from the children alleging sexual abuse by Scott
Powell. Additionally, Jones-Soderman testified that, during
the call, the girls discussed specific instances of abuse
that had occurred in the previous 24-48 hours. At the
conclusion of the call, Jones-Soderman believed that if she
did not get them out of the house that weekend, they would go
through with their pact to kill themselves. Consequently,
Jones-Soderman developed a plan with the children. She told
them she would get in touch with Attorney Schwartz and that
she wanted them to go to the New Canaan Police Department to
file a report.
Jones-Soderman
acknowledged that she was an unlicensed counselor at that
time; she described herself as acting as a "forensic
expert" and "mandated reporter." That said,
she testified that she did not call DCF to report the
allegations of abuse because she was "troubled by the
criminal legalities" with "the relationship with
DCF." Her actions weigh against her claim that she was
acting in the best interest of the children.
At the
time she first spoke to the children, she was aware of the
previous DCF reports, the case history, and Dr. Frazier's
2011 report, in which he had concluded that the children were
not being truthful in making allegations of sexual
abuse.[5] Additionally, she had reviewed the
orders by Judge Mary Sommer in the juvenile court and was
"fully aware of its contents." That means that, at
the time of the events at issue and when she spoke to the
children in March 2016, Jones-Soderman was well aware that,
after hearing from witnesses, ordering the children to be
seen by a Lyme disease specialist, and ordering individual
and interaction psychological evaluations of the parents and
children, Judge Sommer ordered custody and guardianship to be
transferred to Scott Powell. (See Pl. Ex. 16 at 2-3,
5). Jones-Soderman was aware also that, on October 28, 2011,
Mrs. Powell had entered a plea of nolo contendere to an
allegation of child neglect for denying "proper
care" to both C.P. and E.P. and that:
As stipulated by the Rules of Practice, any attempt to
initiate proceedings to modify or otherwise affect the
custody orders of the juvenile court is without legal basis
and subject to dismissal. The above rule of practice clearly
requires that in factual circumstances presented by this case
that any motion for modification or revocation of
guardianship orders must be presented to the juvenile
Page 364
court which issues the original order. The Superior Court
for Juvenile Matters at Stamford has jurisdiction over post
disposition matters relating to custody and guardianship of
the children in this case.
(Pl. Ex. 16 at 3, 6-7).
In
spite of her detailed knowledge of the foregoing,
Jones-Soderman worked with the children to remove them from
Powell's care. Following their call to Jones-Soderman,
C.P. arranged for she and E.P. to sleep over a family
friend's home that Saturday night, and the next morning,
they planned to go to the New Canaan Police Department.
Jones-Soderman testified that she drew up a complaint with
the statements from the children to be sent to Attorney
Schwartz who had been representing Mrs. Powell since July
2015. Jones-Soderman told the children they needed someone to
pick them up on Sunday morning and bring them to the police
station. Initially, they identified a family friend, but
after speaking to Jones-Soderman, this family friend
understood that her involvement could lead to her being sued.
Jones-Soderman described this person as "insecure"
and not "clearly committed[,]" so she asked the
children to name another person, and they named their
maternal grandparents, Cynthia and Rick Diehl.
Again,
at that time, Jones-Soderman knew that Scott Powell had sole
custody of the children and that there was a court order
stating that he had full decision-making power regarding the
level of communication between the children and their
maternal grandparents. She was aware also that Jane Powell
did not "like" or approve of the course of action
she was orchestrating. Nevertheless, Jones-Soderman called
Cynthia and Rick Diehl to tell them that there was an
"extremely serious" and "urgent
matter[,]" that their granddaughters were in "very
grave danger[,]" and that, the children were
"suffering considerably" and thus, they needed the
Diehls' assistance.
Rick
Diehl testified that, when Jones-Soderman contacted him, he
knew he was "suddenly becoming involved in a dramatic
stroke of dire consequences." He found the allegations
about Powell "so surprising[,]" but he felt he was
between a "rock and a hard place" and that he had
to act. After speaking to Mr. Diehl, Jones-Soderman spoke to
the children again, and they "agreed to go through with
the plan[ ]" of going to the police.
On
Sunday morning, March 20, 2016, the Diehls picked up the
children from their sleepover at their friend's home and
took them to the police station.[6] Rick Diehl reported to
the police that he had information that the children's
lives were in danger in their home. The children then relayed
their report to the officers, and, after a short meeting, the
supervisor told them that a youth officer would speak to them
further, which she did, the next day.
When
the children got back in the car, they called Jones-Soderman
to say that they felt the police believed them. C.P. told
Jones-Soderman that she brought her diary with her, which
Jones-Soderman thought demonstrated C.P.'s forethought
and exhibited the "sense of gravity of the
situation." According to Jones-Soderman, the children
had told others of the abuse in the past, but they were
"brushed aside and [Jones-Soderman] was the first person
who heard them and attempted to help them."
Jones-Soderman was aware at ...