On Monday, the 23rd of September, Dusten Brown packed two bags for his
four year old daughter, Veronica, as he prepared to have her escorted to
the non related couple who fought for four years to adopt his child
against his will. Though both he and Veronica are registered members of
the Cherokee Nation, the federal laws put in place to protect them were
declared non-applicable to him and opened the door for South Carolina to
terminate his rights and adopt his child out, all while she resided
with her father several states away in Oklahoma.
The custody battle, known publicly as the Baby Veronica case, is a case
rife with mixed emotions, split sides, and questions over South
Carolina's practice of adopting out children from other states, using
their state laws to declare unmarried fathers not legal parents and
therefore with no rights to contest the adoptions of their children.
Dusten Brown fought long and hard to get custody of his daughter,
fighting her adoption since he was notified of the intent to adopt when
little Veronica was 3 or 4 months old, gaining legal custody and then
having to fight another two years to retain custody. This last summer,
the biggest blow came to his case when the Supreme Court of the United
States ruled that portions of the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply
to him in his fight for his daughter. The ruling was a close one, two
of the dissenting justices giving scathing statements regarding the
interpretation of the law, claiming it was twisted to suit the interests
of the couple seeking to adopt Veronica but pointed out that ICWA would
still apply to Veronica and Brown's extended family. The main ruling
was all the Capobiancos and their legal team needed, though. With the
ruling in hand, the case was kicked back to the lower courts. Based on
the ICWA ruling alone, South Carolina courts reversed the custody order
and demanded that Brown return Veronica to the Capobiancos. Never mind
the fact that the original ruling that granted him custody only had a
small bit to do with ICWA. South Carolina reversed its ruling based on
the SCOTUS's ruling of ICWA alone.
Brown continued to push his legal options and refused to turn Veronica
over to the Capobiancos, which he was within his legal right to contest .
In response to Brown's refusal to hand Veronica over, judge Martin
finalized the adoption and then issued a felony warrant out for Brown's
arrest, citing Custodial Interference. All of this within a matter of
days of the court ruling that reversed the custody order. Veronica, who
had been living with her father for almost two years, was not granted a
best interest hearing. The courts deemed a best interest hearing
unnecessary. In other words: Veronica's civil rights did not matter
and the fact that she was 4 yrs old and living with her father for
almost half her life were irrelevant.
Brown took his case to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, but they later
determined that they could not take over jurisdiction of the case.
Simply put: because the Capobiancos had an adoption order signed by a
judge, they had to honor the state order. Full faith and credit to South
Carolina. Oklahoma could not legally intervene, even though they
pointed out that the finalized adoption order violated both states'
adoption laws.
You heard me right: Judge Martin violated South Carolina adoption law in finalizing Veronica's adoption to Matt and Melanie Capobianco.
SECTION 63-9-750. Final hearing. [SC ST SEC 63-9-750]
(1) the adoptee has been in the actual custody of the petitioner
for a period of ninety days unless the court finds as provided in
subsection (A) that there is good cause for modifying the time within
which the final hearing may be held;
Shown above is actual wording of South Carolina Adoption Laws in regards
to the final hearing in which finalization takes place. By South
Carolina law, Veronica should have been in their physical custody and
residing within the state at the time of finalization. Veronica was
living with her father in Oklahoma.
Another thing to take into consideration is the initial petition to
adopt Veronica when she was a newborn. The law states that the child
must be in the state at the time of the petition. In sworn court
testimony from Melanie Capobianco, she admitted that the petition was
filed when Veronica was 3 days old and she was still in Oklahoma. They
wouldn't even leave Oklahoma until Veronica was a week old. So the
petition alone was not legal. The petition is only good for six months
to a year. Several years have passed. And even if they submitted a new
petition, it was still in violation of the law because Veronica was not
in the state nor in their custody.
SECTION 20-7-1660. Children who may be adopted.
Any child present within this State at the time the petition for adoption is filed, irrespective of place of birth or place of residence, may be adopted.
So Oklahoma courts point out the illegalities of the finalized
adoption order, but cannot contest it since it is an order signed by a
judge, a judge who was deemed incompetent in family law by numerous lawyers. The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling also
barred the Cherokee Nation from assuming jurisdiction, even though
SCOTUS acknowledged that Veronica, her grandparents and stepmom would be
covered under ICWA.
Dusten Brown had no other choice but to hand Veronica over to this
couple hell bent on taking her from him. With the stay being lifted, the
Capobiancos wasted no time in pursuing a federal order that demanded
Veronica's immediate return to their custody. To add further insult to
injury, the South Carolina courts and judge Martin filed a lawsuit
against him for lawyer fees and court costs. He also still has that
extradition hearing to look forward to. It seems that South Carolina is
determined to destroy this man legally and financially for daring to
stand up them and exposing the corrupt nature of their adoption racket.
Brown has been silent on this entire matter for the most part. In
spite of the smear campaign waged against him by the Capobiancos, their public relations firm Trio Solutions (Jessica Munday being the mouthpiece for them) and
even Christie Maldonado, he has not uttered one bad word against them
publicly. Even after his daughter was literally kidnapped from him via a
corrupt court system, he still has not said one bad thing against them.
I imagine he is dealing with a lot of emotions right now. He's facing
prison time and potential financial ruin. One can hope that if the
extradition business is dealt with and dropped, he can go to South
Carolina and challenge the adoption. If put to a full legal challenge,
the adoption would have to be dissolved. South Carolina wouldn't be able to hide from scrutiny if the nation was made fully aware of the laws broken in their zeal to steal Veronica from Brown and efforts to brush this legal circus under the rug.
It's clear now that the finalization of the adoption, the lawsuit and the
criminal charges are all retaliatory measures against Brown for daring
to stand up to the incompetent judge Martin and the adoption industry. The goal? Make an example out of
him and send out the message to all unmarried fathers: the courts have
spoken and you are not considered parents in the eyes of the law, therefore lacking any rights to your
children. You stand up to us and we will destroy you.
Author's edit(9/29/2013) - I would like to point out a correction. In the entry, I state the lawsuit comes from the judge. I am incorrect. It's been verified through several news sources now that the Capobiancos themselves are behind the $500,000 lawsuit for legal fees.
I also found out there was a competing adoption petition from Tommy and Alice Brown, Dusten's parents. Submitted before South Carolina courts finalized Veronica's adoption, another violation of their state laws as well as federal law. ICWA is clear that family and tribe come before placement with a non related, non native family.
