You are on page 1of 10

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

CIVIL ACTION – LAW


_____________________________________
SHAWN MCMAHON, : No. 2017-00285
Plaintiff :
:
vs. : ATTORNEY ID #NA
:
:
JODY MCMAHON, :
Defendant : IN CUSTODY

EMERGENCY PETITION FOR CUSTODY

Petitioner, Jody McMahon, by and through her counsel, herself, files the herein Emergency Petition

for Custody and in support thereof respectfully avers as follows:

1. Petitioner is Jody McMahon, (hereinafter “Mother”).

2. Respondent is Shawn McMahon (hereinafter “Father”).

3. The parties are the natural parents of four (4) minor children as alleged in

previously filed pleadings in this matter. For purposes of complying with the recently enacted Confidentiality

Rules, the minor children will be referred to in this pleading as O.M. (referring to the parties’ oldest male child),

T.M. (referring to the parties’ youngest male child), W.M. (referring to the parties’ oldest female child), and D.M.

(referring to the parties’ youngest female child). Collectively, they will be referred to as “the children.”

4. An Agreed Custody Order was entered by this Honorable Court on January 23, 2017, a copy of which

is was attached in previous filing and marked a part hereof as Exhibit A.

5. Pursuant to the January 23, 2017 Custody Order, the parties have shared legal and shared (50/50)

physical custody of the children, with Father’s physical custody to be supervised at his parents’ residence.

See earlier Exhibit A.

6. On or about May 16, 2018, the parties executed a Stipulation, which was made an

Order of Court on June 18, 2018, terminating Father’s supervised physical custody of the children. A true and

correct copy of the June 18, 2018 Custody Order was also attached to prior filing and made a part hereof as Exhibit

“B”.
7. Subsequent to the termination of Father’s supervised physical custody, the parties’

two (2) youngest children, W.M. and D.M., made statements to Mother and to other third parties indicating Father

has been sexually abusing them. This Honorable Court heard the true testimony of Taramin Stuber, Suzi Alessi,

Mikaela Engarde, and Mary Pandya regarding these concerns, to include statements and observations, over the

course of the four days of trial that was held on November 26, 27, 28, and 30th of 2018.

8. During this same trial, individuals from two of the children’s school testified that their

concerns were for the children and any relations to Mother were based solely on what they had been told,

often through third parties, rather than their own observations. This resulted in This Honorable Court

ordering that W.M.’s kindergarten teacher, Mrs. Frey, testify. This witness presented a conflict of interest for

Mother’s counsel. The Court ruled on this matter, reconsidered it, and ultimately held an additional day of

trial to address this matter on Monday, December 10, later ruling that Mother would serve as her own

counsel as she vehemently sought immediate relief for her children and did not possess the funds to retain

additional counsel. During this time, Mother also continued to seek a Child Advocate for her children, in

particular, her three (3) and six (6) year old daughters who Father is demanding and This Court has ordered

will testify in Chambers with adult males to include questioning about the sexual abuse they have and

potentially continue to endure, and all while there isn’t so much as any representation from Mother’s side

present, let alone resources for the children.

9. Dr. Dianna Rosenstein, in her custody evaluation already submitted into evidence on or about the

March 2018 portion of trial, objectively diagnosed Father as a “chronic psychopathic deviant” who is “highly

manipulative” and “will have violent outbursts with his wife and children” in addition to setting a poor

example and defying authority, and refuse to seek meaningful counseling for his chronic condition. Dr.

Rosenstein testified to the biased nature of the subjective portion of her report. This does not negate the

objective findings, however, as they remain of importance, particularly in light of Father’s refusal to

complete any additional evaluations, sign any releases for the counseling he attended with Mother after he

assaulted her, or seek treatment for his chronic condition. Father’s objective diagnosis continues to severely
negatively impact those around him to include all four of the young children as is specifically evidenced in

the custody factors to date.

10. Prior to the vast court proceedings, the school aged children were consistently recognized for

accolades to include Good Citizenship and achievements in sports and academics. The younger children

were noted as “great kids” as well, to include by the MCAP previously assigned to them. As a direct result of

Father’s ongoing impact on all of the children, each has become increasingly openly disrespectful at times,

aggressive, to include physically so, often lacking in basic hygienics and manners, lacking in self-esteem as

well as courtesy and consideration of self and others, to include property, prone to stealing and attempting to

lie or manipulate situations/others, incidents of resorting to intimidation tactics to include physical, and

demonstrations of a desperate desire to please those around them, particularly Father and his step-father, Paul

Jones, the man who raised Father.

11. On or about July of 2018, Mission Kids Interviews were conducted yet again, and on Father’s

custodial time, though in no way were requested at that time by Mother. A report was filed with OCY against

Mother for W.M.’s overly sexual behavior during this interview. Mother was cleared of this in full.

12. Detective Matt Tinneny, from Hatfield Police Department testified in November of 2018 that a lack

of physical evidence does not mean no sexual abuse has occurred. Det. Tinenny, unprompted by Mother’s

counsel throughout, testified that his contact with Father had been primarily through Father’s Criminal and

Divorce attorneys. Det. Tinneny went on to testify that Hatfield’s case was no longer active as a result of the

ADA taking the case over. Mother has yet to have had any contact with anyone from the ADA’s office

regarding this.

13. In addition to the ever increasing observable behaviors of concern regarding the children, Father’s

refusal to co-parent etc., and the damage this causes the children and others is deeply concerning. Mother

respectfully requests this Honorable Court’s swift and thorough intervention on this.
14. Likewise, Father’s impact on the physical health of the children and others, must be addressed. He

poses a direct risk to the physical safety of multiple people who are in routine contact with him. This contact

must be highly limited and safely structured to lessen this damaging impact.

15. On Monday, December 31, 2018, Father and his step-father, Paul Jones returned the children to

Mother just before 6:00pm with the start of a bruise on W.M.’s eye visibly forming. Mother did not draw

unhelpful attention to this. As the bruising increased with time, Mother took W.M. to the children’s

pediatrician to have this further examined. In response, Father became hostile and accused Mother of

assaulting her own daughter, though Mother has no history or diagnosis that would support such a false

claim or outrageous concern. Father has a lengthy history of such behavior to include physically assaulting

Mother, T.M., and O.M. at minimum, and all under the guise of his actions being “accidents” or the fault of

the individual/s hurt.

16. While any divorce is difficult, particularly on children, this situation continues to grow more and

more unhealthy as Father continues to once again spiral out of control. What would be referred to as “bad

parenting” in isolation, when viewed in full, clearly amounts to the severe and greatly concerning abuse of

four small children, and those who support them, all who continue to fail to be helped and by the very

individuals paid to do so. Father’s manipulative diagnosis permits him to thrive on this as he is skilled at

misrepresentation, whereas Mother remains focused on truthful and accurate information. The children

witness that Mother’s truthful approach does not benefit her or them but Father’s tactics often produce

results more favorable, encouraging them to be less truthful and less respectful towards authority in return.

This is of great concern for them now and in the future.

17. Based on all of the foregoing and more, Mother has significant concerns about the safety and well-

being of all four (4) children if left unsupervised with Father, or supervised by any individual of his

choosing, who will likely work to continue to hide the abusive impact Father has, rather than prevent it.

18. Mother believes and therefore avers that it is in the children’s best interests for
Father to have immediate supervised custody of the children pending the results of a genuine full

investigation she is requesting. This Honorable Court has already discussed ordering a Sexual Abuse

Evaluation, recognizing these grave concerns with all four young children. Detective Tinneny has already

testified to the probability that this abuse does exist and is ongoing. OCY Supervisor, Andrew Hornak,

though determined by the Court to be lacking credibility as a whole, has already revealed through his

testimony the vast limitations of OCY and inaccuracy regarding reports, expungements, and other

information of the like, exposing that these four young children have for lack of better term, fallen through

the cracks of the system.

19. Having witnessed this Honorable Court’s response to Mr. Liam Duffy’s questioning of Mother regarding

information shared with others, particularly those with the Press, and relying solely on basic internet research

such as “Google” in an attempt to gain knowledge of the “in camera” label, prior counsel entered Mother

into, though Mother has yet to view any actual cameras in the courtroom and was never informed of what

this meant, let alone her informed consent received, Mother has been in open communication with the

Attorney General, on the guidance of the vast support network Mother spoke with in an attempt to secure

Legal Counsel, at the Honorable Court’s direction. Though Mother remains no politician or lawyer, as this

gentleman has guided her to seek a FULL investigation, custody modification to ensure the children’s

immediate safety, and Mother continues to seek full transparency asking for the truth, the whole truth, and

nothing but the truth, Mother requests that this Honorable Court demand a full investigation to include the

sexual, physical, mental/emotional abuse of all four children, as well as the inconsistent statements during

the testimony of individuals to include OCY caseworker, Mr. Matt Porter and Andrew Hornak, Detective

Walter Kerr, and all who have attempted to hide the abuse of these children and silence their and their

Mother’s screams for help.

20. Mother therefore requests this Honorable Court to enter an immediate Order granting her

primary physical custody of the children, and requiring all of Father’s physical custody of the children to be

carefully supervised, pending the results of such a true and complete investigation and evaluation process.
21. In addition to Father’s time resuming genuine supervision for the safety of the children, Mother requests that this
Honorable Court consider the Attorney General’s additional suggestion of immediate modification to the
current Custody Agreement and impose clear guidelines surrounding any and all of Father’s custodial time to
include: all children are to be with Father, supervised, on Tuesday and Wednesday nights. All children are to
be with Mother on Monday and Thursday nights. All weekends are to rotate between the two. Custody
exchange from Father’s time to Mother is to occur with all four children the following morning (eg.
following Father’s supervised Tuesday and Wednesday custodial nights, all four children would return to
Mother Thursday morning; likewise, Father’s supervised weekend time would close with the return of the
children to Mother Monday morning). This exchange is to occur curbside at Mother’s home, on camera,
between 7:15am-7:30am. Transportation is to be supervised as well. Mother’s custodial time is to close at
Father’s designated time of 6:00pm for all four children (eg. following Mother’s custodial Monday night, all
four children would be picked up curbside, on camera, from Mother’s home at 6:00pm, likewise on Friday at
6:00pm following Mother’s Thursday night custodial time for Father’s weekends). These clear guidelines
will ensure additional safety and stability for four young children greatly in need of this. This will also
enable Mother to appropriately tend to the children’s medical, nutritional, educational, emotional, and other
such basic needs more consistently, as Father is negatively impacting all of these areas. The children will all
undergo and remain in therapy to include on an individual basis. The children will all be seen by their
pediatrician’s office for medical needs or, as a last resort, an Urgent Care facility trained in pediatrics. The
children will remain in the school district where their mother resides. The children will be permitted to attend
their activities. Father will no longer sign the children up for activities without first gaining Mother’s
consent. Mother may continue to sign the children up for (and take the children to) their routine activities and
will notify Father if the children elect an additional/new interest. The children will be permitted to see their
Mother and her loved ones for special occasions. Mother will continue to support the same in return for
Father’s family in the best interest of the children.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Jody McMahon, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter an Order
granting her primary physical custody of the children, and granting Father supervised physical custody of the
children with aforementioned modifications, pending the results of a complete and in-depth investigation and
sexual abuse evaluation, as well as an additional evaluation of Father by a specific court ordered Doctor and
investigation into Father’s/Paul Jone’s other criminal behaviors to include accessing of other’s emails,
phone, clouds, internet, etc. of the like.

Respectfully submitted,
______________________________
Jody L. McMahon; ID #NA
189 Anthony Wayne Drive
Pottstown PA 19464
484-354-1314
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION – LAW

_____________________________________
SHAWN MCMAHON, : No. 2017-00285
Plaintiff :
:
vs. : ATTORNEY ID #NA
:
:
JODY MCMAHON, :
Defendant : IN CUSTODY

ORDER

AND NOW, this day of 2019, upon consideration of Defendant’s

Emergency Petition for Custody and any answer thereto it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED as follows:

1. Defendant’s Emergency Petition for Custody is GRANTED.

2. Defendant shall have primary physical custody of the children, and Plaintiff shall have

supervised physical custody of the children as follows __________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________with

aforementioned modifications, pending the results of a complete and in-depth investigation

and sexual abuse evaluation, as well as an additional evaluation of Father by Doctor

__________________________ and investigation into Father’s/Paul Jone’s other criminal

behaviors to include accessing of other’s emails, phone, clouds, internet, etc. of the like.

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________

J.
VERIFICATION

I, Jody L. McMahon, verify that the statements made in the foregoing pleading are
true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the
penalties of 18 Pa.CSA §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.

_____Jody L. McMahon_____
Jody L. McMahon

DATE: _____01/09/2019___
BY: Jody L. McMahon, Mother Attorney for Defendant (self)
ATTORNEY ID. # NA
189 Anthony Wayne Drive
Pottstown PA 19464
(484) 354-1314
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION – LAW
SHAWN MCMAHON : NO. 2017-00285
:
vs. : IN CUSTODY
:
JODY MCMAHON :
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Jody L. McMahon, Mother, do hereby certify that a time-stamped copy of Defendant’s
Petition for Contempt of Custody Order was served upon Plaintiff’s attorney by email and
regular mail at the below address:

Liam Duffy, Esquire & Amy Stern, Esquire


Rubin, Glickman, Steinberg and Gifford, P.C.

2605 North Broad Street


P. O. Box 1277
Lansdale, PA 19446
ljd@rgsglaw.com
ars@rgsglaw.com
__Jody L. McMahon__________
Jody L. McMahon, Mother