Tom Vilsack is greatly relieved.
Posted on 01/07/2009 11:32:27 AM PST by Huntress
Turns out, Little Bear was nothing more than Big Brother.
An Omaha man has sued his ex-wife after she or someone on her behalf inserted an audio recorder into their 4-year-old daughter's teddy bear during the couple's custody battle.
According to the lawsuit, Dianna Divingnzzo or her father planted a listening device inside Little Bear in an effort to lay bare any secrets of Divingnzzo's ex-husband, William "Duke" Lewton.
The plan backfired, however, when the judge presiding over child custody proceedings refused to hear the recordings. Sarpy County District Judge David Arterburn noted that under Nebraska law, at least one person in a conversation must consent to a recording.
No one - not even the bear - consented in this case.
Now Lewton, 36, and several people recorded by the bear want Divingnzzo, her dad and her former attorneys to pay for invading their privacy.
"I just can't imagine the thought of someone taking that little bear's head off and implanting a device," Lewton said Tuesday. "It's . . . incomprehensible."
The device might appear to be ripped from the script of the 2000 movie comedy "Meet the Parents," but attorneys say custody battles have always been personal and sometimes vicious. Feuding spouses have long hired private detectives to try to uncover behaviors that would cause a judge to declare an estranged partner an unfit parent.
Lewton said his ex-wife did just that - had private detectives tail him for months, to the point of planting a GPS device on two of his vehicles.
Then there was his daughter's favorite bear - nothing more than a teddy bear's head with a blanket attached.
Lewton said he gave "Little Bear" to his daughter long ago. Little did he know that the miniature bear, which the child carried with her everywhere, was doing more than just staring at him with its beady eyes.
Lewton's attorney, John Kinney, said "the bear" recorded dozens of hours of visits from at least December 2007 through May 2008. Lewton said the recordings revealed nothing beyond the normal interactions between a dad and his daughter.
The Divingnzzos did not return calls seeking comment.
The recordings were discovered after Divingnzzo reported them to a therapist who was monitoring the child custody case. Divingnzzo's father transcribed hours of recordings - adding interpretation of various sounds.
"The level of emotion in custody cases often blinds people," Kinney said. "You combine it with modern technology, and it sort of becomes dangerous."
This one became invasive. Lewton's fiancee, neighbor, cousin and even some court-appointed workers who visited Lewton's home joined Lewton in the lawsuit - alleging that their privacy was violated.
In addition to suing Divingnzzo and her dad, Lewton sued Divingnzzo's former attorneys -William Bianco and Christopher Perrone of Papillion.
Perrone said Tuesday that he and Bianco never advised Divingnzzo to record her ex-husband, nor do they advocate that clients hire private detectives.
In fact, said Perrone, a former Sarpy County prosecutor, they withdrew from representing Divingnzzo shortly after the recordings were discovered.
A transcript of a June hearing over the tapes reinforces the attorneys' lack of knowledge about them. But it also shows that Bianco argued that the tapes could be used in the custody case.
According to the transcript, Bianco acknowledged that he hadn't determined whether his client's actions were legal.
But because this was a civil dispute, Bianco argued that the tapes are "relevant and should be admissible."
"I believe the tape recording of Mr. Lewton by my client and her father provides a window that professionals and this court can use to see where this child should be placed," Bianco said.
Arterburn, the judge, blanched at the thought.
He noted at the hearing that it is illegal for anyone to even review the results of an illegally obtained recording. So Arterburn pushed aside any transcripts of the tapes - saying that Divingnzzo's actions could have constituted a felony.
"The court cannot be a party to or reward what may be a felony offense," he ruled.
Divingnzzo has not been charged in criminal court.
Lewton said he decided against contacting police about the bugged bear.
He said he simply wanted to make sure that he was awarded more visitation with his daughter. He recently got his wish.
He now has joint custody - and takes care of the girl a little less than half of the time.
Lewton said his daughter, now 5, "knows mommy and daddy don't get along."
But she doesn't know to what lengths her dad goes to ensure that he's not being bugged.
Lewton said he searches his daughter's coats and puts his daughter's toys and teddy bears in the microwave for a few seconds. That way, he theorizes, the microwave will "zap" any recording device inside.
Meanwhile, the custody battle continues.
Dianna Divingnzzo recently filed a motion to move the daughter to another state - saying she has job offers elsewhere.
Lewton said that's part of why he decided to sue.
"I wish we could get along," he said, "but it just keeps going and going."
• Contact the writer: 444-1275, todd.cooper@owh.com
Tom Vilsack is greatly relieved.
I am glad the judge did the right thing.
This judge has clear evidence that a felony has taken place. And yet it seems he’s taken a pass on going after the mother. Why is that? The woman and her father should be in prison. Her attorneys are supposed to be officers of the court. Aren’t they required to notify the court if they know a felony has been committed under their watch? They are not representing her for this felony, so they have no obligation to look the other way due to attorney client privilege on the matter. Do they?
Dumb broad. Doesn’t she know all she had to do was accuse the ex of “touching” the child inappropriately and he would’ve taken directly to jail and banned from ever seeing his daughter without shackles on?
That was a fine meal, Little Bear.
Care for some dessert now?
“No thanks—I’m stuffed!” LB
(nyuk nyuk nyuk)
What I wanna know is,,,,,,,,
How in the he!! do you pronounce -” Divingnzzo”-????
I’d like to buy a vowel please.
Good questions. I’m no expert on criminal law, but I am an attorney.
With respect to the mother’s attorneys, I’d say that whatever she told them about recording device is privileged in any event, even though they no longer represent her. They did the right thing by withdrawing from the case when they found out—they can’t rat her out, but they also can’t assist her in committing a crime.
The judge only has jurisdiction over the custody case, and doesn’t have the authority to bring criminal charges against the mother. He could sanction the mother, find her in contempt of court, or notify the local prosecutor of the case, so that the prosecutor could investigate and possibly file charges.
2nd from l, back row.
Not hardly guilty.
cell phones for kids have GPS tracking devises. Just saying.
Someone violated the bear, charge him/her!!!!
Don’t you know??? Only men get in trouble for that kind of thing. A woman in my town scammed the court and got child support from her ex-bf,,, for a child that *didn’t even exist*.
She was busted bringing a neighbors borrowed infant to a court hearing. The woman got a slap on the wrist, and the man STILL isn’t entitled to get back the fraudulent child support he had paid.
That is just so wrong on so many levels.
You do realize that that guy is Zer0’s nominee for Secretary of Agriculture.
In that pic, he looks more like a nominee to be listed in some Megan’s Law registry.
The article doesn’t say anything about how they found out.
Did the father find it, or didn’t he know until his ex-wife’s lawyer tried to present the tapes to the judge...
Not even close. Forgive and forget. Mother is always right. Those dastardly men...
I know what you mean. I’ve heard some horror stories as well. That one pretty much takes the cake though.
The Institute decries this travesty of justice
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.