Press Release on the Stephen Lewis Case in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
Stephen Lewis is the man that started the issues in the Montgomery County jail, yet he was the only man not released from Montgomery County jail.
His trial starts this coming Monday at 9am. I hope we can fill the courtroom. Attached please find Marla and Gena's press release that is its final stages. Once finished, this needs circulated.
Your comments to Gena or Marla will be much appreciated.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/pennsylvania/counties/montgomery_county/7471597.htm
Stephen Lewis has been fighting the Montgomery County Court system for over five years because they were not calculating his indebtedness correctly and were failing to give him the proper credit for payments he had made.
When he was first divorced he had three growing businesses and agreed to pay more child support than was required because he wanted to take care of his children. He agreed to pay $6,000 per month.
Because of the downturn of the business climate his businesses began to fail and he was left with one business struggling to stay alive.
It was at this time that his ex-wife took his children and moved to Philadelphia from Bakersfield, California. She told him it would be for one year and she would return. She said if he would sign permission for her to take the children (it was required at that time) and give jurisdiction for future enforcement proceedings to Philadelphia she would consider allowing the family to live under one roof when she returned to California so that he could be with the children all the time. He signed this petition and the jurisdiction was transferred to Philadelphia.
This was in 1999. She has not returned and any enforcement actions or changes to the agreement now have to be made in Philadelphia.
In 2000, after his businesses began to fail, he began the process of requesting a reduction in his child support to reflect his new, much reduced income. When he went before the Montgomery County Family Court, Judge Daniele refused to accept any of the evidence documenting his reduced income, even though adjustments in support due to change in income are processed regularly across the nation. Stephen managed to hire an attorney at this time, but found that the attorney wasn't concerned about pushing too hard on the case because he had to appear before this judge all the time and he didn.t want to make her mad.
Mr. Lewis continued struggling and making what payments he could, but he fell behind in paying the exorbitant amount to which he initially agreed due to his failed business ventures. He simply no longer earned the substantial income he had anticipated earning at the time of the settlement.
In June 2000, his ex-wife told him that he could come to Philadelphia to see his children, and that she would not press for his arrest for not being current on his payments. When he arrived, the police were waiting for him, and he was arrested on an illegal warrant (he had filed for bankruptcy which would stop an enforcement action), which Judge Daniele acknowledged was illegal[GC1] . She proceeded with a contempt hearing (which of course he had no prior notice of and no defense attorney was allowed. ) Judge Daniele pronounced him in contempt, despite the illegal warrant, for failure to pay the agreed amount of child support. He was then incarcerated with a purge amount of $27,000.
That was his total arrearages based on the original high child support agreement.
After three months, Mr. Lewis. parents drew down their retirement to free him from jail since he did not have the money to pay the arrearages, and without payment he would remain in jail indefinitely. 6 months at a time). As Mr. Lewis prepared to leave the detention facility, the judge called and indicated that Mr. Lewis now had to pay an additional $16,000 in support that had accrued since he had been in jail before he could be released. Again, his parents withdrew the additional amount from their quickly dwindling retirement fund in order to keep Mr. Lewis from being incarcerated any longer. While he was in jail (almost three months) the struggling business he had left went under, and he was left with no income at all.
In trying to find a way to support his children [GC2], he completed a law program to become an attorney and successfully passed the California Bar Exam in 1999. His ex-wife, however contacted the licensing board and informed them of his lack of payment without explaining the change in income and the license board denied him a license.
He was not allowed to become a licensed practicing attorney. However, he continued to try to develop a viable business to be able to support his children adequately, so he became a Licensed Mediator for family litigation.
He has worked hard and had a fledgling business in this area before his second arrest in September of 2003.
At the time of his arrest, he was bringing in about $3,000 per month. Obviously the $6,000 per month child support agreement was still impossible. However, he has continued to make child support payments. He has paid as much as he can and has had to continue to borrow from his parents to meet the emergencies his children had.
Therefore, when the child support he was capable of paying was correctly calculated according to the California code, Mr. Lewis was current at the time of his arrest. He does not have any assets left and his parents retirement is gone.
There is no more money, but he continues to be in debtors prison for non-payment of child support.
In Montgomery County once you go before a judge, that same judge continues to hear your case. He has sued the judge who continues to hear his case for violations of his civil rights and was proceeding with a Federal lawsuit against the county when he was arrested.
Judge Daniele has also refused to obey a court order issued by another judge to recalculate the child support, refused to allow him to present evidence, and made obviously prejudicial statements. Mr. Lewis, on at least 3 separate occasions, asked the judge to recuse herself for obvious prejudice. She refused.
When he was incarcerated for the second time without a hearing and again denied counsel, his family started looking for help on the internet. All of the father's rights groups were contacted. The family found that there was a huge number of non-custodial parents receiving the same illegal treatment in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is one of only four states that consistently denies defendants counsel and imprisons them illegally.
After learning of a similar case in Northern Pennsylvania where the ACLU had successfully obtained the release of illegally incarcerated parents in Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, the family contacted the ACLU in Montgomery County and worked with them on getting the names and the numbers of prisoners held there under these circumstances.
On December 8th, because of a request issued by the ACLU to the President of Judges in Montgomery County, many incarcerated parents were released. The attached press release was issued at 12:30 PM EST. The family is relieved that information about this situation has been made public, and parents will now be treated more fairly. The down side to the story is that Judge Daniele is in charge of the release of these parents.
Although she has released a number of other illegally incarcerated parents, she has refused to release Mr. Lewis. Her grounds were that Mr. Lewis has passed the Bar and does not need an attorney. In courts across the nation, attorneys are discouraged in representing themselves and have a right to their own attorney, and in any case, as Mr. Lewis is not a practicing attorney. Even if he was, he passed the Bar in California, not in Pennsylvania. The judge still refuses to provide him with counsel and continues to violate his civil rights.
There is a hearing in her court Monday, December 15, 2003 where Mr. Lewis will again try to prove that he cannot pay the $6,000 per month child support that the court is trying to force him to pay. He will again try to get the judge to order a recalculation according to a court order issued in 2001 by another Montgomery County judge who heard his case while she was unavailable. There has been no explanation for why the Domestic Relations Department of Montgomery County has not obeyed this order. This recalculation will lower the child support to an amount he can pay. With all of the payments he has paid over the past two years, he would then be current. He has continued to make what payments he could and he has done his best to support his children. Mr. Lewis has paid over $750,000 in child support over the past 11 years (a matter of record) so obviously he is not a "deadbeat dad".
The family is till working to ensure he gets a fair trial. The ACLU continues to be involved and the family is trying to find a way to get him a public defender, whose office turned him down at first because they said they didn't get involved in civil cases. With the new order from the President Judge, the family has heard that a public defender will now represent him. Which actually shows he should have been defended in the first place and is no different than those that are being released.
Because of the history he has had with the judge presiding over his case, the family fears his chances of a fair trial are slim. This hearing is a continuation of a continuation of a hearing started in September, Judge Daniele has continued it twice, once in the middle of a witness who had to travel from California, is elderly and cannot make the return trip. Since he cannot return to be cross-examined, she will probably strike his entire testimony, which is crucial to Stephen's case.
During this entire time, he has been incarcerated, and wasn't given an attorney, forcing him to act as his own attorney. The following are a few points of interest in looking at what has gone wrong with Mr. Lewis. case.
 | If Mr. Lewis had an attorney, she/he could prepare a witness for testimony and review exhibits with the witness to develop a strategy and clarify any possible misconceptions. The judge, however, won't allow Mr. Lewis (who she has stated is his own attorney) to talk to his witnesses about the trial. |
| His attorney could present the tax returns, bank statements, money transfer receipts, and other evidence that not only support his claim of drastically reduced income but could also prove that he has made payments that have not been credited to him. |
| The judge has kept Mr. Lewis. domestic relations file for extended periods of time and only he can have access to it. Since he is in jail this is almost impossible. |
| Mr. Lewis's official file in the county courthouse is incomplete. There are orders and other documentation missing. They are listed on the docket, but not in the file. The judge has also kept this file for extended periods of time. Two applications made to reduce child support were never responded to and are not in the file. Mr. Lewis. has records of these applications. |
| Mr. Lewis was in jail for two months before he was informed on what charge he was being held. Mr. Lewis could not defend himself against a charge of which he was unaware. |
| Since Mr. Lewis. incarceration, all of his records have been moved because he was evicted from his office and the house he was renting. The family is trying to put together his financial records, but can only talk to him through the prison phone system. The calls have to be prepaid, collect, and cost $15 for 15 minutes. This type of communication unacceptable and would not be tolerated in a criminal case. |
| These calls are subject to recording so the court system has access to any of these private conversations, which would normally be protected by attorney-client privilege. |
| Because he has no attorney, Mr. Lewis has made attempts to prepare his case in jail, but the inmates do not have access to civil code law material, only criminal. Child support is a civil matter. |
| Since these hearings are in Philadelphia, and his family and witnesses live in California the multiple continuations are such a hardship on the witnesses that one of the witnesses heard in the previous hearing cannot return so his whole testimony will be stricken. |
The family would very much appreciate the opportunity to speak with anyone in your office to give them all the information about this case. We believe Mr. Lewis's only chance for a fair trial is to bring the courts continued violations to the light of public awareness.
Since this is not an isolated case, demonstrated by the numbers of inmates that have been released in Lawrence County and Montgomery County alone, it seems this abuse of civil rights should be put under scrutiny by the press and public. This punitive treatment of fathers that do the best they can to support their families is not what the child support system was designed to do. It was designed to provide fair and adequate support for children of non-custodial parents, so that children might live under the same standard as their parents. Mr. Lewis's children> have lived well above his standard of living for some time, by his choice.
He would rather send them his money than pay his own bills. But, still this has not been enough.
The family hopes that you will decide to investigate this issue further. However, be aware that much of the information put forth by the Pennsylvania officials in this case has been both inaccurate and patently false. The family has documentation to support these allegations and it is hoped that this evidence will be given due consideration in the composition of any story concerning this issue. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Please contact either sister at the addresses below.
Sincerely,
Gena Clark & Marla Maynard on behalf of Stephen Lewis
Gena Clark
(661) 589-7388, (661) 747-4396
4205 Lightning Ct.
Bakersfield, CA 93312
Marla Maynard
(Contact information removed by request of Mike Maynard)
