The Controversial Holly Collins Custody Case--What Really Happened?
January 26th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
The Holly Collins custody/parental abduction case is perhaps the most prominent custody case in the media at this moment. Holly Collins and her supporters among domestic violence and feminist advocates assert that the case demonstrates that family courts are biased against battered women and favor abusive men. Below I take a look at the evidence in the case.
Holly Collins and Mark Collins had two children, Zachary (born April, 1983) and Jennifer (born May, 1985), before getting divorced in 1990. After the divorce, there was a highly contentious custody battle, during which Holly Collins repeatedly alleged that Mark Collins had abused both her and the children. Holly Collins moved the children to Massachusetts in 1991 but the court found that she was denying Mark Collins contact with the children and ordered that they return to Minneapolis in June, 1992.
Mark Collins claimed that Holly was interfering and obstructing his relationship with his children, and attempting to alienate the children from him. Holly Collins drew support from the Minneapolis domestic violence community, and the case drew considerable media attention. During this period, the case's custody evaluators noted "in response to routine questions about custodial plans, Holly stated 'I'll make the biggest media circus out of this if I have to. I'll do whatever it takes if Mark gets custody.'"
Hennepin County Family Court services found that Holly Collins suffers from multiple disorders, including Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy (MSbP), where a parent invents, induces or exaggerates medical symptoms in a child. Hennepin County Family Court Services and the Guardian ad Litem in the case recommended that Mark Collins be granted legal and physical custody of the children and that Holly Collins have supervised visitation.
In December of 1992, Minnesota Family Court Judge Michael J. Davis found "the evidence is overwhelming that the children are at great physical and emotional risk if the children remained in Holly Collins' care" and awarded custody of the then-9 and 7-year-old children to Mark Collins. To read the Court's ruling, see document #12 here.
After the custody switch, Holly Collins claimed that Zachary and Jennifer were being severely abused by Mark Collins and his wife Rena, and that the children's health was in danger because of Mark Collins' alleged lack of concern over their alleged medical issues. In an April, 1993 report to the Court, Guardian ad Litem Michael J. London describes the children's state as being exactly the opposite of what Holly Collins claimed. In the report, he wrote:
Since the change in custody on December 22, 1992, I visited with the children on three occasions; attended a doctor's appointment with the children's allergist, Dr. Blum; spoken with the children's pediatrician; met with Dr. Cline and Dr. Davis; spoken with Dr. Cline on numerous occasions; met with the children's schoolteachers; spoken with the mother of one of Zachary's friends; spoken with Mr. Collins and Ms. Learmonth [Holly Collins' attorney] several times; met with court services and child protection and reviewed substantial amounts of written material. My observations in discussions with those involved reveal two happy children who have adjusted very well to the change in custody.
To read London's report, see document number #26 here.
The Minnesota Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's award of custody to Mark Collins in March of 1994. The Court of Appeal noted that "the children have adjusted well to the new custody arrangement" in Mark Collins' care and that "the children's health has improved."
The court said that Holly Collins' accusations that Mark Collins and his current wife were abusing the children were "found to be without substance," and that the lower court's finding that Holly Collins' care "endangered [the children's] physical and emotional health" was "supported by evidence in the record."
According to Judge Davis, Michael London, Esq., the Guardian ad Litem in the case, said that Holly Collins appeared to be "therapist shopping" to find a therapist who would support her version of events in the case. The Court of Appeal noted that the record supports the lower court's finding that Holly Collins "suffers from a personality disorder." To read the Court of Appeal's ruling, see document #13 here.
Judges ruling on the case at various levels repeatedly found that Holly Collins tried to interfere with Mark Collins' relationship with his children and alienate them from him. For example, in February 1992, Judge Steven C. Lange and Referee Marybeth Dorn found that "the children's emotional and psychological health may be harmed if they continue in the physical care of the respondent [Holly Collins], if she continues to alienate them from the petitioner [Mark Collins] and deny visitation." In March, 1994 the Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's ruling in December of 1992, explaining that the trial court's findings "reflect mother's chronic and unreasonable failure to comply with court ordered visitation." The Court of Appeal also upheld a lower court's finding that Holly Collins had "instilled fear of father in both children."
After the Court of Appeal denied Holly Collins' appeal for a custody switch from Mark Collins to Holly Collins in March of 1994, Holly Collins kidnapped Zachary and Jennifer (along with her baby Christopher, fathered by Jeff Imm), and took all three children to Holland. Holly, who was sought by the FBI for the kidnapping, claimed that her ex-husband Mark Collins was severely abusing the children and that she needed to flee to protect them.
According to the Minneapolis City Pages, which has published numerous articles sympathetic to Holly Collins, in 2008, the "felony kidnapping charges were dropped in exchange for Holly Collins pleading to a lesser charge...She was sentenced to unsupervised probation for one year, or until she completes 40 hours of community service, which she plans to serve in the Netherlands."
Jennifer Collins, Holly's now 23-year-old daughter who was kidnapped from her father's custody while a young child, supports her mother's version of events, and has presented her side of the story in the media. Holly Collins has also garnered widespread sympathy from domestic violence and feminist advocacy organizations, including: the Battered Mothers Custody Conference; The Leadership Council; the California Protective Parents Association; the Institute on Violence, Abuse, and Trauma; Women's eNews; and others.
Jennifer and Holly were interviewed by Inside Edition and Jennifer Collins appeared on a Fox News TV show last fall, explaining "My father was always abusive. He broke my brothers skull when he was 4. [He ended up getting custody] because he used Parental Alienation Syndrome."
Jennifer, Holly, and their allies in the domestic violence and feminist advocacy community believe that Holly Collins lost her court case in part because Mark Collins made false accusations of parental alienation, and have cited Holly's case as a prominent example of why parental alienation is "junk science."
Since Collins resurfaced in 2008 I have not seen any newspaper, radio or TV reporter or commentator take a close look at the record in the Holly Collins case. I have done so, and there are many problems with Holly Collins' version of the events in her case. Below I list and discuss some of them, and provide links to documentation.
Problem #1--For decades Holly Collins has made accusations of abuse against a wide variety of people.
Those whom Holly has accused of varying degrees of abuse include:
a) Holly's mother Eleanor Gallagher
b) Holly's stepfather Tom Gallagher
c) Robert Connors, Holly's former landlord in Marblehead, Massachusetts in 1992. Holly had a dispute with Connors over rent, a dispute which Connors won, and Holly accused Connors of abuse.
d) Jaap Hogewoning, Holly's former neighbor in Holland. According to the Minneapolis City Pages, Holly accused Hogewoning of "beating" her.
e) Mark Collins, Holly's ex-husband and father of Zachary and Jennifer
f) Rena Peters (aka "Rena Collins"), Mark Collins' wife, who Holly accused of hitting her with her car
g) Jeff Imm, father of Holly's third child, Christopher. Holly claims that Jeff emotionally abused their child.
h) Beth Imm, Jeff's wife. Holly claims that Beth emotionally abused their child.
i) Her former brother-in law, her sister Michelle's ex-husband.
According to Family Court Judge Michael J. Davis, in a private in camera meeting with Holly Collins, Holly "described a history of abuse which started when she was a child and continued throughout her marriage."
Problem #2--Holly Collins has repeatedly made accusations of domestic violence or child abuse to a variety of courts, and courts have continually rejected her claims.
As a general rule, when requests for Protection/Restraining Orders based on accusations of domestic violence or abuse are made, courts have a pronounced tendency to "err on the side of caution" by granting the orders. Child protective services often have the same tendency. However, Holly Collins' repeated requests for protection/restraining orders based on her allegations of abuse have been continually rejected by courts, and her allegations of child abuse against Mark Collins have been continually rejected by child protective services. These include:
a) October 1988--Holly Collins alleges that her mother, Eleanor Gallagher, assaulted her. The court rejected this, marking it "exceptionally cleared."
b) December 1990--Holly Collins alleges her then-husband Mark Collins abused her and seeks restraining order. The Court dismissed this.
c) December, 1990 --Holly seeks a temporary restraining order against Rena Peters (aka Rena Collins), Mark Collins' wife, alleging that Rena assaulted her. Dismissed
d) April, 1991--Holly reports Mark Collins to child protective services for alleged child abuse. Dismissed.
e) July, 1991--Holly reports Mark Collins to child protective services for alleged child abuse. Dismissed.
f) September, 1991 -- Holly again files for restraining order against her mother, Eleanor Gallagher, alleging that her mother abused her. Dismissed.
g) December, 1991 -- Holly again files for restraining order against her mother, Eleanor Gallagher, alleging that her mother abused her. Judge orders Gallagher to file her own abuse petition against Holly Collins, which is granted. Mutual restraining orders expire in May of 1992.
h) August, 1992 -- Holly Collins alleges that Mark Collins was stalking her in Minnesota, including peeking in the windows and frightening Holly and the children. According to Family Court Judge Michael J. Davis, "there was no substantiation of claim."
i) August, 1992--Holly files child abuse charges against Mark with child protection services. Dismissed.
j) October, 1993--Holly files child abuse charges against Mark with child protection services. Dismissed.
To view the court dispositions of a few of these rejected accusations, see document #14 here. Like any litigant, Holly was able to get temporary emergency restraining orders, but these orders were continually rejected and dismissed by the courts at the subsequent hearings.
Problem #3--Holly Collins has repeatedly accused Mark Collins of fracturing their son Zachary's skull in a violent rage. However, the injury was sustained by Zachary when he fell forward on a ride in an amusement park. Holly Collins sued the amusement park for the injury and obtained a $50,000 financial award from the park on Zachary's behalf. Moreover, Holly did not make this accusation of abuse in her court filings during the custody dispute in 1991 & 1992, several years after the alleged incident.
Holly Collins accused ex-husband Mark Collins of having fractured their son Zachary's skull in 1987, both in her bid for refugee status in Holland in 1994 and numerous times since. Jennifer Collins made this accusation at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference, and makes it several times on her website, as well as in letters to me. In December 2008, Jennifer wrote:
"My father fractured the bones [in] my brother’s skull by slamming him into the wall one night when my brother tried to stop him from beating our mom. I have even posted the medical records of my 4-year-old brother's fractured skull from 1987."
Zachary sustained a head injury during an accident at Canobie Lake Park in New Hampshire in 1986. The legal settlement between the Park and Holly over Zachary's injury states:
"[O]n or about May 10, 1986, the plaintiff Holly Collins and her minor child Zachary were at the Canobie Lake amusement park...Zachary Collins was injured while riding on a 'kiddie ride' identified as the 'junior turnpikes sports car' ride.
"As the ride came to halt, the minor child fell forward hitting his head on the inside of the car in which he was riding. Plaintiff Zachary Collins suffered an acute head trauma resulting in severe headaches, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, blackouts."
To see the legal settlement between the Park and Holly over Zachary's injury, see document #1 here and document #2 here. According to the court document, "total payments to be made [to Zachary for the injury] equals $50,000.00."
Holly and Jennifer have posted selected parts of an apparent 1987 medical report on Zachary's injury on the Internet. There are several problems with Holly's version of these events:
a) There is no mention in the lawsuit--which wasn't settled until 1990--of a new, separate head injury to Zachary. Had there been a separate injury, it certainly would have been an issue regarding the lawsuit and settlement.
b) Holly Collins says Mark Collins fractured Zachary's skull in 1987, but Holly Collins does not make this claim in her June, 1991 legal petition to move the children's residence to from Minnesota to Massachusetts. Instead, she only alleges that Mark has ignored the children's medical needs, a claim which was later discredited. To read this court order, see document #27 here (see finding #7).
c) There is no evidence that Holly made this claim during Mark Collins' request for a custody change in early 1992. In her February 28, 1992 court order, the only reference Referee Marybeth Dorn makes to allegations of abuse regards alleged medical neglect--"The respondent [Holly Collins] continues to make allegations that the petitioner [Mark Collins] provides a dangerous environment for the children during periods of visitation. All of the respondent's current representations have been repeatedly addressed by this Court on numerous occasions. It appears in the children experience significant medical difficulties when they are in the respondent's care, not the petitioner's." To read this court order, see document #28 here.
d) During the five-day custody trial before Minnesota Family Court Judge Michael J. Davis there was no reference or record of Holly Collins alleging that Mark Collins fractured Zachary's skull. To read the Court's ruling, see document #12 here.
e) There is no record of any of the doctors who allegedly saw Zachary Collins for his 1987 "skull fracture" reporting it to Child Protective Services, even though all physicians in this situation were mandated reporters.
Problem #4--Dr. David W. Cline, M.D. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, who is Board Certified in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, was Zachary and Jennifer Collins' psychiatrist during the latter part of the Collins' marriage. The children resumed their therapy with Dr. Cline in 1992 until they were kidnapped by Holly Collins in l994. Cline's findings in the case contradict Holly Collins' version of events on a wide range of issues. According to Dr. Cline:
"[U]pon repeated and thorough investigation, Hennepin County Family Court services found that there was no evidence for physical or sexual abuse, which was also confirmed by child protection who investigated numerous complaints [from Holly Collins] that abuse had occurred."
"In December of 1992 Judge [Michael J.] Davis reversed custody to Mark Collins. His findings that Holly was overprotective and potentially dangerous to the children's well-being was substantiated by multiple reports, testimony, and evidence gathered by the court during this extensive hearing."
"After Judge Davis made the decision to put legal and physical custody with Mark Collins... the children were seen regularly [by me] with Mark and Rena Collins. They rapidly accepted this decision and engaged in building of a relationship that was harmonious, joyous, and health producing. The particulars of this relationship as it further developed in 1993 are documented in my progress notes. The children's behavior in school continues to improve and they finished the school year missing very few days and with good marks in contrast to frequently missing school because of alleged illnesses [while living with Holly Collins] prior to the change of custody."
"During the course of 1993 and 1994 Holly Collins made frequent accusations that the children were being maltreated. Investigation of these items by me and others found them to be false..."
"[Zachary and Jennifer Collins] remain happy and well-adjusted in the care of Mark and Rena Collins and especially enjoyed the relationship with their grandmother, Eleanor Gallagher, who they saw frequently."
"Their abduction on June 30, 1994 by their mother, Holly Collins, is likely to produce disruption and emotional turmoil of a moderate to severe degree judging from the response that occurred when under Holly's care previously."
To read Dr. Cline's findings, see document #3 here.
Problem #5--After the custody switch, Guardian ad Litem Michael J. London extensively investigated the children's situation, interviewing a wide variety of concerned parties, including the children's allergist, pediatrician, and other doctors, the children's schoolteachers, the mother of one of Zachary's friends, and court services and child protection. London's investigation found "happy children who have adjusted very well to the change in custody." While Holly Collins has repeatedly accused both Mark Collins and Rena Collins of being cruel and abusive to Zachary and Jennifer, London found a warm, loving relationship between the children and their father and stepmother.
In an April, 1993 report to the Court, London wrote:
The children appeared quite comfortable in both their conversations and physical touching with Mark and Rena. While children sought assistance from either adult without preference, it was interesting to note that although Rena Collins was uncomfortable due to a pregnancy, she allowed Jennifer to sit on her lap. The situation was handled with kindness and affection by Rena and Jennifer had no understanding of the discomfort she might be causing...
I had the opportunity to meet with the children's school teachers on March 26, 1993. Zachary's teacher, Mary Kelly, told me that Zachary appears much more relaxed than earlier in the school year [when he was in Holly's care]. She finds he laughs and smiles more. She states he used to act out when angry but now acts much more appropriately. He is well-liked by his peers and is sought out by his classmates. He is improving academically and volunteers in class.
She notes that he is receiving help at home with his schoolwork. She specifically pointed out Catholic Theme week. Zachary came dressed each day for the "theme of the day." She stated that this took some care, thought and preparation, and that he obviously got help from home.
Jennifer's teacher, Linda Fonstad, relates that Jennifer is a friendly, outspoken and popular child. She is a kind person who is well-liked. She also does well academically and socially.
Both teachers stated that they did not observe any behavior, by either child, which would reveal they were unhappy or mistreated. They also said they have paid particular attention to the children since the article which appeared in the newspaper, and noticed nothing but happy, normal children.
To read London's report, see document #26 here.
Problem #6--Holly Collins' 1991 move to Massachusetts helped remove Mark Collins from his children's lives and put Zachary and Jennifer in harm's way.
As paraphrased by the Minnesota Court of Appeals, the District Court found that the following changes occurred after Holly Collins was allowed to move to Massachusetts with Zachary and Jennifer in 1991:
"the children's health and well-being have suffered; the older child began demonstrating suicidal behavior, and the younger child was hospitalized due to psychosocial problems; and mother became preoccupied with the children's health, refused to comply with the visitation schedule, installed fear of the father in both children, revived allegations of fathers abuse against her and the children, and made unsubstantiated new allegations of abuse."
The District Court found that Zachary Collins was only suicidal when in Holly Collins' care, and the Court of Appeals agreed. The District Court found that Holly Collins was subjecting the children to unnecessary and potentially harmful medical treatments in Massachusetts, and the Court of Appeals agreed.
To read these court findings, see document #13 here.
Problem #7--Holly's accusations of abuse against her mother and stepfather are repeatedly contradicted by her own statements and actions, as well as by the statements of her sister and her brother.
When Holly moved with the children from Minnesota to Massachusetts in 1991, she moved in with her mother, Eleanor Gallagher, and her stepfather Tom Gallagher. Holly's behavior while in their house was erratic and problematic, and eventually Holly's mother asked her to move out. Soon afterwards, Holly refused to allow her mother and her grandmother to visit the children. Holly then accused her mother of having abused her when she was a child.
Eleanor and Tom fought to have grandparent visitation with their young grandchildren Jennifer and Zachary, who loved them and with whom they had a good relationship. This positive relationship is documented in the record in numerous places. For example, Dr. David W. Cline, M.D. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, who is Board Certified in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, regularly treated Zachary and Jennifer Collins in 1989-1990 prior to their move to Massachusetts and again in 1992-1994 after their return to Minnesota. In a July 14, 1994 Psychiatric Summary, Dr. Cline wrote:
"The children especially enjoyed their relationship with their grandmother, Eleanor Gallagher, who they saw frequently..."
To read Dr. Cline's findings, see document #3 here.
In an April 22, 1993 letter to Guardian ad Litem Michael London, Esq., Dr Cline wrote:
It is clear that [grandmother Eleanor Gallagher] and her mother [great-grandmother Mary Therien] add significantly to the development and nurturance of the children. I recommend that this relationship be supported and continue unobstructed and unsupervised for the future.
To read Dr. Cline's letter to London, see document #21 here.
In an April, 1993 report to the Court, Guardian ad Litem Michael J. London wrote:
I agree with Dr. Cline's proposal [that the children have unobstructed and unsupervised visits with their grandmother, Eleanor Gallagher, and their great grandmother, Mary Therien]. I believe the children would like to have access to their grandparents and other extended family members.
To read London's report, see document #26 here.
As Eleanor and Tom were about to be granted grandparent visitation, Holly accused her stepfather, Tom Gallagher, of sexually abusing her when she was a child. These accusations are contradicted by Holly's own statements, as well as those of her sister Michelle Ek and her brother Michael Tveter:
a) On several occasions during Holly Collins' adulthood she wrote letters to Tom Gallagher praising him and expressing her love for him. This includes a 1990 letter in which Holly writes:
"I am so proud of you...I am extremely grateful for all that you have done for me. I'm sure I've tried your patience many times. It would have been so easy to give up on me...you didn't! Thank you!
The letter, document #6, can be seen here.
b) Holly praised Tom Gallagher's loving bond with his grandchildren Zachary and Jennifer. In the 1990 letter, Holly writes:
"My children love you dearly you are the most wonderful grandfather! They and I have the utmost respect for you."
The letter, document #6, can be seen here.
c) Michelle Ek, Holly Collins' sister, in a sworn affidavit dated July 6, 1993, says:
"My stepfather [Tom Gallagher] has never abused Holly, me, Zachary or Jennifer or anyone else that I know of."
To read Michelle Ek's 7/6/93 affidavit, see document #7 here.
d) Michelle Ek, Holly Collins' sister, in a sworn affidavit dated June 18, 1992, says:
"I have read Holly's affidavit. Many things she said are just not true.... I have never seen my mother, Eleanor Gallagher yell at Zachary or Jennifer Collins. I have never seen her slap them. They love my mother and always wanted to go to her house."
To read Michelle Ek's 6/18/92 affidavit, see document #20 here. In it, Michelle Ek contradicts several of Holly Collins' claims.
e) Michael Tveter, Holly's brother, in a sworn affidavit taken during his time in the Marine Corps stationed at Subic Bay in the Philippines, stated:
"I have not been physically or emotionally abused by my mother, Eleanor T. Gallagher, nor by my stepfather, Thomas J. Gallagher. In addition, I know of no cases where my sisters, Holly or Michelle, have been abused by any member of my family."
To read Michael Tveter's sworn affidavit, see document #17 here.
e) Michael Tveter, Holly's brother, in a sworn deposition taken during his time in the Marine Corps stationed at the KMCS First Radio Battalion in Hawaii, denied that Tom Gallagher or Eleanor Gallagher had ever abused his sister Holly, his sister Michelle, himself, their grandson Zachary, their granddaughter Jennifer, or each other in any way. He said that he had never seen any abuse nor been told of any by his sisters.
To read Michael Tveter's sworn deposition, see document #18 here.
f) When Holly was 16 years old she had a dispute with her mother, who wanted her to finish high school before getting married to Mark Collins. As a result of this dispute, Holly desired to live with her biological father, from whom Eleanor Gallagher was divorced.
The Guardian ad Litem conducted a custody evaluation. During this custody evaluation, Holly made no accusation of abuse against either her mother Eleanor Gallagher or her stepfather Tom Gallagher. Yet a decade later she accused both of them of having abused her while she was a child.
Also, Holly at 16 recommended to the Guardian ad Litem that her two siblings, Michelle and Michael, continue to live with Eleanor and Tom. The court upheld Eleanor's sole custody of her children.
g) Holly claimed that her mother abused her throughout her childhood. However, later, when Holly was pregnant with Zachary, Holly asked Eleanor to be her birthing coach which she did. While Holly lived with Mark Collins at Mark's parents' house, Holly would drop off Zachary at her mother's house who then cared for the child while Holly attended school. In a sworn affidavit, Ann H. Collins, Mark Collins' mother, states:
During the last stages of Holly's pregnancy she took birthing classes and because Mark was in Texas [in the military] she asked her mother, Eleanor, to be her birthing coach. Eleanor agreed and did so attend the classes, except for one. She was out of town on one of the nights I substituted for. This is the only time that I attended these classes.
After the birth of Zachary in Texas Holly returned to New Hampshire to finish high school at the urging of her mother and grandmother. She stayed at my home and was driven by my husband, Gerald, to her mother's home each morning. She would then leave the baby with her mother [Eleanor Gallagher] and have full use of her mother's car to attend classes.
To read Ann H. Collins' sworn affidavit, see document #22 here.
Problem #8--Two of Holly's immediate female family members have gotten domestic violence restraining orders against Holly. These include:
a) Michelle Ek, Holly's younger sister who suffers from cerebral palsy, got a domestic violence restraining order against Holly on August 14, 1992 in New Hampshire. The restraining order states "a court finds that the defendant [Holly Collins] has abused the plaintiff [Michelle Ek] within the meaning of RSA 173-B."
To view Michelle's domestic violence restraining order against Holly Collins, see document #8 here.
b) Eleanor Gallagher, Holly Collins mother, obtained a domestic violence restraining order against Holly Collins in December, 1991.
To view Eleanor's domestic violence restraining order against Holly Collins, see document #15 here.
Problem #9 -- Dr. Philip Reimherr stated that Zachary had reported memories of Mark Collins breaking Holly Collins' nose. According to Holly Collins' court filings, she was seen for this nose injury on December 30, 1982. Zachary's "memory" of this injury is impossible--he had not even been born at that time.
Problem #10--Holly Collins recently told the Minneapolis City Pages (7/30/08) that even after she and Mark separated "It got to the point where every time he dropped off the kids [from visitation], he'd do something to me...Punch me in the face, push me into the wall."
This is an accusation that Holly has recently repeated on the Internet. However, there has never been substantiation of these claims. It is unlikely that, in the middle of a contentious custody battle, amid constant accusations of abuse, Mark Collins would be beating Holly "every time he dropped off the kids." Moreover, Holly never had someone there to make sure that Mark would not beat her? She never arranged for there to be a witness? Or to tape the incidents? Or to arrange to have the visitation drop off in a different manner?
Problem #11--Holly invented mythical food allergies for the children which were contradicted by many medical professionals. Once custody of Zachary and Jennifer was switched from Holly Collins to Mark Collins, the allergies soon dissipated.
On October 17, 1991 Jennifer suffered a cyanotic attack and was brought to the North Shore Children's Emergency Room. Psychiatrist Dr. Barbara Burr wrote in her report that "recent visits to the North Shore Children's Emergency Room culminated in admission there though child was virtually asymptomatic. She was referred to [Boston Children's Hospital] for further assessment."
Dr. Burr was concerned because Holly was "applying pressure to physicians to prescribe meds, assign diagnoses, and label the children chronically ill." To view Dr. Burr's report, see document #23 here (see paragraph 2).
On December 9, 1991 Jennifer was brought to Boston Children's Hospital by Holly Collins for an alleged cyanotic attack. Doctors suspected that there was something wrong with Holly, and ordered a psychological assessment of both Holly and Jennifer. Additional immunological testing was ordered for the children to determine the validity of Holly's allegations that the children were allergic to 20 different foods, and that Zachary was deathly allergic to bee stings.
Holly didn't follow through with the psychological treatment the concerned medical professionals wanted her to have. The children were tested by Dr. Stephen Polmer (CHMC) and found to have insignificant food allergies. Moreover, Zachary was not allergic to bee stings.
Later, Dr. Paul Hannaway also doubted the severity of the kids' allergies. Dr. William Yee also did allergy testing on the children, and found that they were within normal range.
Nevertheless, Holly filed reports with Minnesota child protective services accusing Mark of feeding the children foods which they were allergic to. Child protective services found the accusation to be groundless.
Jennifer Rojer of Hennepin County Family Court Services says that she and her colleagues "saw a lot of evidence that it was Holly's anxiety that was creating symptoms in the children, both the suicidal behaviors and some of the asthmatic allergic reactions that they may be having."
Elizabeth Sullivan, MA, of the North Shore Children's Hospital in Massachusetts, also expressed concerns over Holly's parenting style.
After the change of custody to Mark Collins, the children's health improved. According to a February 22, 1993 Minneapolis Metro/Star News article written during the custody case, court-appointed child psychologist Susan Devries found that "the children's illnesses abate when they're with their father. 'The children are rarely observed to suffer from asthmatic or allergic reactions while in Mark's presence and have not required any kind of emergency room care or medical treatment,' DeVries reports." To read this article, see document #19 here.
In her February 28, 1992 court order, Referee Marybeth Dorn writes:
The respondent [Holly Collins] continues to make allegations that the petitioner [Mark Collins] provides a dangerous environment for the children during periods of visitation. All of the respondent's current representations have been repeatedly addressed by this Court on numerous occasions. It appears the children experience significant medical difficulties when they are in the respondent's care, not the petitioner's...
There also exists concern that the respondent overemphasizes and dwells on the children's medical status, to their detriment...medical reports...indicate concern on the part of physicians in Massachusetts that the respondent is preoccupied with the children's medical condition.
To read this court order, see document #28 here.
The Minnesota Court of Appeal, in affirming the lower court's award of custody to the father in March of 1994, noted that since the custody switch "the children's health has improved." To read the Court of Appeal's ruling, see document #13 here.
In an April, 1993 report to the Court, Guardian ad Litem Michael J. London describes the children as being healthy and happy, and that Mark Collins was attentive to the children's medical needs, which were normal. To read London's report, see document number #26 here.
The children's healthy, normal life under Mark Collins' care can be contrasted with the way Holly herself described the children's medical condition under her care in a 1991 request to the court for an ex-parte order. Holly wrote:
Both children are on home nebulazation therapy and extensive preventative as well as symptom-alleviating medicines. They also have injection syringes which must be kept on hand at all times. They also have been prescribed a home oxygen unit for the severity of the disease.
To view Holly's request, see document #31 here.
Holly did initially succeed in misleading a few doctors into believing that Zachary and Jennifer had significant allergies. What these doctors did not realize at first was that at the time the children were living in a household in which, according to Dr. Paul M. Blum, M.D., there were "numerous animals having the run of the house." To view Dr. Blum's letter, see document #24 here.
In an April, 1991 letter from Dr. Paul M. Blum, M.D. to physician David Estrin, M.D., he wrote:
Environmental review reveals a menagerie living at the house. There is a dog, cat, rabbit, guinea pig, hamster, all with constant access to this child.
To view Dr. Blum's letter, see document #25 here.
In a different April, 1991 letter from Dr. Blum to Dr. Estrin, M.D., he said the Collins family needed "environmental control issues includ[ing] removal of all pets from the home with the exception of a dog." To view Dr. Blum's letter, see document #24 here.
The doctors at first also did not realize that the children's health problems were partly caused by Holly Collins overmedicating them.
Problem #12-- Holly Collins has suffered from psychiatric and emotional problems from a young age and also as an adult. Doctors involved in the case assert that these problems also include delusional characteristics.
In her early teens Holly Collins attempted suicide by overdosing on sleeping pills, and told court services personnel that she tried to kill herself by slitting her wrists. According to a 1983 report concerning her parents' custody case as a teenager, the Guardian ad Litem wrote "her attempts [at suicide] were little more than attention getting devices, and that there was no intention of actually taking her life...Holly candidly admitted to being jealous of the preferential treatment that was received by her sister Michelle as a result of Michelle's handicap."
According to a report by Ronald L. Jorgenson, Ph.D., Chief Clinical Psychologist of Psychological Services of Hennepin County Department of Court and Field Services, Holly says she has attempted suicide three times. Dr. Jorgenson found:
[Holly Collins] may experience delusional beliefs from time to time... Holly was unable to directly answer questions related to the allegations Mark made about her. She often reacted with tears and recrimination against Mark, but would not address her own behavior.... she frequently contacted his office with a series of crises. When investigated, most had little or no real substance.... Holly's exaggerated, hysterical quality can also be seen in her interactions with Dr. Paul Blum, the children's allergist.
In a notarized letter, Holly Collins' mother and grandmother assert that Holly suffers from an untreated mental illness. They state:
"Holly suffered bouts of depression and was in psychiatric counseling since the age of 15...probably needs help as the trial court recognized in its order. She will not benefit from help until she stops fantasizing about the causes of her problems and addresses herself." (See document #4 here.)
Dr. Paul Rhudnick, a clinical psychologist in Salem, Massachusetts, conducted a psychological evaluation of Holly and found:
[Holly Collins has] pronounced obsessional trends characterized by introspection, deliberation and heavy reliance on fantasy. In addition, there are examples of...a tendency to use some hysterical features...[Holly Collins] often retreats into her own world of fantasy which is exceedingly complex.
See finding #42 in document #30 here.
Problem #13-- Holly has made a exceedingly large number of accusations of abuse against a wide variety of people. Holly claims she was:
Punched in the face by her mother
Deprived of food as a child
Hit by her mother with a riding crop
Hit by her mother for wasting food
Sexually abused by her stepfather
Kidnapped by her mother in an attempt to force her to have an abortion
Raped by Mark five times
Beat up by Mark
Punched in the nose
Made to have objects, including a knife and a carrot peeler, inserted into her, causing a miscarriage
Punched by Mark to make doctors think that she had a disease which caused bruises
Induced into labor by Mark, who used a black pen on her. In Holly Collins' appeal to the Minnesota Court of Appeals she stated that she was only "7 1/2 months pregnant" when labor was induced by sexual relations with Mark. (According to Holly Collins' mother and grandmother, at the time Holly was actually nine months pregnant and Zachary was born a full term, healthy, baby boy who weighed 7 lbs. 10 oz.)
Given a fractured wrist while blocking a punch from Mark
Forced to perform oral sex on Mark
Cut with a knife on her genitals after Mark had broken in and raped her after they had separated
Hit by her mother, causing her to call the police
Hit on purpose with a car by Rena Collins, Mark's subsequent wife
Hit by her mother after moving in with her mother as an adult
Threatened over the phone by Mark repeatedly
Had her nose broken by Mark at least three times
Punched or pushed into a wall by Mark "every time he dropped off the kids [from visitation]"
Beaten so severely by Mark during their first month of marriage that she was sent to the hospital three times
Beaten by Mark Collins while pregnant.
Abused by her landlord in Massachusetts who, we're told, was "a violent man who was charged with murdering his own father. Holly was terrified of him."
Abused by her neighbor in Holland.
According to Holly and Jennifer, records show that at age 7 Jennifer told her therapist that both Mark Collins and his wife Rena Collins "hit," "strangled," and "kicked [Jennifer] so hard [she] couldn't walk and [she] had to crawl to my room." Rena also allegedly "squeezed [Jennifer's] head," kicked her and said "You'll never get to see your mom again!'"
According to Holly and Jennifer, records show that at age 9 Zachary told his therapist "[my father] punched me in the privates… strangled us… kicked me in the head… threatened to kill us and [he’s] just pretending it didn’t happen...my father would suffocate us until we passed out. We repeatedly told authorities that our father held his hand or a pillow over our faces until 'it all turned black'...“[Mark Collins would] cover our face and nose… pin us down… hold us under blankets...[put his] hand over our face and nose we couldn’t breathe.”
Mark Collins wrote in a statement to the court:
"One reason the list of abuse allegations in so long is that it seems that Holly feels the bigger the list, the more horrific the accusation, the more likely that at least some of her story would be believed."
Problem #14--Holly Collins made repeated unfounded accusations that Mark Collins had a problem with substance abuse.
According to the court record, Mark submitted to testing for substance-abuse three times -- twice by Mr. Johnson of Hennepin court services, and once by a private counselor -- and all three evaluations concluded that Mark Collins does not have a substance abuse problem.
Problem #15--Holly Collins has made numerous accusations of abuse against ex-husband Mark Collins, and these accusations have been continually rejected by courts, child protective agencies, custody evaluators, and the mental health professionals involved in the case. However, the trial court did find domestic violence due to a legal error by Mark Collins, who was litigating pro se.
The Court of Appeal concluded that "it cannot be said that the District Court clearly erred finding that domestic abuse occurred between the parties." This was a result of a critical legal mistake made by Mark Collins when he was litigating pro se. The incident in question occurred at Mark Collins' parents' home. Holly and Mark were play wrestling as they often did because Mark, even though small in stature, had been a successful wrestler.
Holly did suffer a nose injury from play wrestling with Mark in 1982. Because Mark made a pro se legal mistake and did not refute Holly's allegations many years later that it was a deliberate act, the District Court had to find domestic abuse, and for technical reasons the Appellate Court could not reverse the lower court's decision.
This version of events is supported by Holly's mother Eleanor Gallagher and Holly's grandmother Mary Therien, as well as Gerald and Nancy Ann Collins, Mark Collins' parents, in a notarized affidavit submitted to the Fourth Judicial Court in Minneapolis, Minnesota. They wrote:
Holly received a contusion of the nose in 1982 while in family play with Mark, which was not intentional but solely an accident. Gerald and Nancy Collins and Mark's sister were present in the home when the incident occurred.
To read this notarized affidavit, see document #4 here.
During the custody trial, Holly Collins accused Mark Collins of dislocating her shoulder. However, family members assert that while growing up, Holly had a shoulder that would periodically pop out of joint.
Problem #16--Holly Collins claimed that Mark Collins raped her, but her own testimony and assertions contradict this claim.
According to Judge Davis, during the custody trial in 1992, Holly Collins "stated that the Petitioner [Mark Collins] raped her and as a result she became pregnant. In a separate proceeding in Massachusetts re: grandparent visitation, however, respondent [Holly Collins] submitted an affidavit stating she intentionally got pregnant to escape her mother's home. In speaking with therapists and other professionals, respondent also reported she wanted to get pregnant to get out of the home."
To read the court's finding, see document #30 here.
Problem #17--There have been seven different judges who have ruled on Holly Collins' custody battles--and all seven of them have ruled against her.
Below they are listed in order of their appearance:
Minnesota Family Court Judge Steven Z. Lange, 1991-1992 (Document #28 here.)
Minnesota Family Court Referee Marybeth Dorn, 1991-1992 (Document #28 here.)
Minnesota Family Court Judge Michael J. Davis, 1992 (Document #12 here.)
Minnesota Family Court Judge Charles A. Porter, Jr., 1993-present (According to the Minneapolis City pages, in "August 1993, Porter issued an order reaffirming Mark's custody of Zachary and Jennifer and denying Holly's request for unsupervised visitation." In a new ruling regarding custody of Holly Collins' third child, Christopher, Porter held Holly Collins in contempt of court for "willful failure to comply with the Custody Order." To view the January 7, 2009 decision, see document #29 here)
Appeal Court Judge Thomas J. Kalitowski, Presiding Judge, 1994 (Document #13 here.)
Appeal Court Judge Randolph W. Peterson, 1994 (Document #13 here.)
Appeal Court Judge James C. Harten, 1994 (Document #13 here.)
Problem #18--According to Holly Collins' mother, the children fared vastly better in Mark's care than in Holly's, where they were unsafe.
In a letter written to the court on March 22, 1994, Eleanor Gallagher, Holly Collins mother, details the vast improvements in the children's physical and mental well-being since they were taken from Holly Collins custody in December of 1992 and placed in father Mark Collins' custody. Ms. Gallagher writes:
[In my opinion and that of] other family members, the children's general attitude about their own well-being has changed markedly over the past year. They are both more "alive." Jennifer is happy and it is reflected in her attitude, posture and smile. She has also informed [me] that she has "outgrown her food allergies" and has assured me that she can eat anything...
It is obvious that Jennifer is finally becoming her own person and more secure within herself. For example, one year ago, Jennifer would stop a neighborhood kickball game by uncontrollable outburst of emotion, pretending an injury or actually coming to tears when she did not successfully get the base. She solicited sympathy by portraying yourself as injured and helpless, often accusing other participants of playing unfairly if she was "thrown out." Since that time Jennifer has come a long way and relies less on manipulation to get her way. She is stronger both physically and mentally...[Jennifer] belongs to Girl Scouts... is a good student... is happy and...a very busy girl.
Both children are physically fit. For example, Zachary reported that he was the fastest runner in the mile in his school and that when timed, he was capable of executing 78 sit-ups in one minute. Zachary is sports minded [and] aspires to attend college...
It is obvious that family relationships and the Collins home have improved dramatically between the children and their father Mark and Rena.... affection in the home is displayed openly and appropriately. For example, the children initiate hugs and kisses when saying goodbye to their father, Rena...and again upon greeting them after being away on our overnight visits or it
The children call their father "dad" instead of "Mark" as they did a year ago...there is no doubt that the children are healthier and happier than they were a year ago.
To read Eleanor Gallagher's letter to the Court, see document #16 here.
Problem #19--Holly Collins has made contradictory statements about the threats she claimed came from Mark Collins during phone calls.
Holly Collins claimed that Mark Collins threatened her during phone conversations over a period of several months, an accusation she maintains today. In a letter Holly wrote to Mark dated December 13, 1992, she stated that she taped all their phone conversations. However, she later admitted that she did not have any of these alleged threats on tape.
Holly Collins admitted to taping phone conversations with her sister (who was later granted a domestic violence restraining order against Holly) and several conversations with the Guardian ad Litem. However, even though she was involved in a contentious custody battle with Mark, and claimed that he had repeatedly threatened her, she never had Mark's threats on tape.
Problem #20--Several of the mental health professionals involved in the case described incidents consistent with Mark Collins' assertion that Holly Collins sought to alienate or brainwash the children against him.
According to Judge Davis:
In April 1992 [while Holly Collins had custody of the children], Ms. Susan Devries, MA, LW, Child Psychologist, Hennepin County Family Court Services conducted psychological testing of the children. Ms. Devries found Zachary to be a depressed, anxious and fragile boy, who internalized is a great deal of anger regarding the environment in general; associated with both male and female figures. Zachary described incidents of abuse by petitioner [Mark Collins] with a flat affect; he didn't appear upset or angry when describing the abuse.... Jennifer also described an incident of abuse by petitioner [Mark Collins] and his current wife [Rena Collins], but did so with little effect...
During the period of July through December 1992, Dr. Cline [who had treated the children as far back as 1989] met with Zachary 17 times and Jennifer 15 times... the court recognizes that Dr. Cline is the only clinician involved in this case was had extensive contact with both the children, the parents and stepparent... Dr. Cline noted that when Zachary resumed treatment in July, 1992, he found Zachary "more bitter, resentful, angry and hostile in general, specifically towards his father." Dr. Cline noted that "[d]uring the summer of 1992, [Zachary] had several episodes of suicidal threats as reported to me by Holly, usually by phone. When I would ask Zachary about this he would tacitly acknowledge this"...
Dr. Cline noted that since resuming treatment, Jennifer was also more adamant, accusatory, and vehement and confrontational to petitioner [Mark Collins] about his alleged misdeeds. "Nevertheless, both children are able to turn off these hostile stances and play genuinely and happily with their father in a play situation, a circumstance which I noted on many occasions." Dr. Cline further stated:
"[I]n my professional opinion, the children have been influenced a great deal by their mother in regards to the alleged abuse that occurred. The children are skilled accusers. They confronted their father directly and unremittingly about his wrongdoing in my presence. Children do not do this unless they have been coached and skilled in this technique...
"The children say that they have been physically abused by their father but the story frequently changes..."
The Guardian ad Litem had numerous opportunities to observe the children alone and with respondent, petitioner, and Rena Collins. His observations are as follows:
"While with their mother, the children expressed fear and anxiety over seeing their father however, upon observation the children quickly become relaxed with Mr. Collins and appeared to enjoy the time they spend with him.... their behavior did not appear to be consistent with the years of safety or abuse. The children sought out physical contact with Mark, i.e., holding hands, sitting on his lap, leaning on him, et cetera.
"Even though initially each visit began with the children's statement that they did not want to see their father, they soon warmed up with him. Their apprehensions seem to disappear quite soon and they appeared to enjoy spending time with Mark...
"[m]y feeling is that the children want a relationship with their father, but are fearful to let their mother know their desire... based upon my review of documents, consultation with the professionals and my observations of Ms. Collins with the children, the children appear to be exposed to a significant amount of fear and anxiety created by Holly. The children stated their mother helps them remember things their father did to them...my impression is that Ms. Collins is significantly contributing to the children's fears and anxiety."
Jennifer Livingston Rojer and Michelle Millenacker of Family Court services conducted the custody evaluation and, according to Judge Davis, "had numerous opportunities to observe the children with petitioner [Mark Collins]." Ms. Rojer and Ms. Millenacker found:
Jennifer and Zachary's behaviors during parent/child observations with Mark seem to contradict many of their verbal statements. Both children relax quickly, initiate affection and seemed to enjoy a spirited, sometimes competitive relationship with their father. Their behaviors, especially the rough-and-tumble nature of the play they initiate, is not typical of that of physically abused children who are interacting with their abusers.
Zachary and Jennifer would often present a litany of complaints and reasons as to why they did not want to be at their father's in interviews, but they did not change expressions or protest when told that the visitation would go ahead. In fact, they engaged in choosing what activities they would do with their father and Rena, often expressing great excitement and anticipation.
Problem #21--Fred Emilianowicz, a social worker from Massachusetts, told the court that he believed Holly's allegations of abuse. However, he did this without ever having spoken or contacted Mark Collins, and he refused to do so, thus his opinion was not taken seriously by the court.
This is noted by Judge Davis in his amended opinion--see finding number 30 in document #30 here. To learn more, read Holly's mother Eleanor Gallagher's 1994 letter on the subject--document #9 here.
Problem #22--Dr. Eli Newberger, a pediatrician formerly of Boston Children's Hospital, is one of the few professionals who believed that Holly Collins' claims had some validity. However, Dr. Newberger has been widely criticized for uncritically validating abuse charges.
To learn more about Newberger's actions in the Collins case, read Eleanor Gallagher's letters to the Office of General Counsel of Boston Children's Hospital requesting an internal review of Newberger's involvement in the Collins case--document #10 here and #11 here.
Dr. Eli Newberger is controversial and has often been criticized for seeing child abuse and family violence where it doesn't exist. The child abuse team he led at Boston Children's Hospital was investigated, criticized and overhauled. From the Boston Globe's "Children's Hospital to Overhaul handling of Abuse Cases" (3/8/99):
Children's Hospital, responding to a recent spate of complaints about its diagnostic judgment in some child abuse cases, is planning a major retooling of its child protection unit.
The overhaul follows an outside assessment of the child abuse team, written in October by University of Colorado Medical School dean Dr. Richard Krugman, and was prompted by a Globe article examining the unit's role in a handful of controversial abuse cases.
Krugman's report identifies several areas of concern for the child protection team, which was established in 1971 and until now was under the medical supervision of its founder, Dr. Eli Newberger...
Critics of the team have said it has pushed an abuse scenario without fully considering the latest research into possible underlying disease causes for children's symptoms or injuries. Other critics have complained that the team's aggressive approach is colored more by the perspective of social workers and lawyers than by doctors sticking to the medical evidence.
In an interview, hospital executive vice president Eileen Sporing acknowledged that the perception of bias "has arisen over time, probably because social workers and lawyers are full-time members of the team while physicians rotate through"...
A Globe article last August cited four unpublicized cases where a court ultimately overturned the medical judgment of Children's doctors that abuse had taken place...
A December article chronicled the case of Hana Cheng, a 16-year-old Belmont girl, and what happened to her family in the aftermath of a brain hemorrhage Cheng suffered in May 1997. Children's subsequently filed a neglect complaint against her parents with the DSS. Outraged, the Chengs accused Children's doctors of "abusing their powers" by turning a family tragedy into a legal ordeal...
Newberger is no longer with Children's Hospital.
Problem #23--Holly Collins asserts that the mental health problems suffered by then-eight-year-old Zachary Collins resulted from him being agitated after phone calls with his father. However, the record strongly suggests that these problems were brought on by Holly, not Mark Collins.
According to Minnesota family court judge Michael J. Davis, Dr. David W. Cline reported that he observed Holly Collins "whispering into Zachary's ear and Zachary immediately went to Dr. Cline's office and reported that he was afraid his father would hurt him and that he would hurt himself."
According to one therapist, during a family therapy session on May 27, 1992 "Zachary was in an agitated state and was banging his head on the floor." At the same time, Zachary was having problems in school, missed 17 days of school during one semester, suffered from what Holly described as severe health issues, and was continually being taken to doctors for medical testing.
However, just six months after custody of Zachary and Jennifer was transferred from Holly Collins to Mark Collins, the situation had improved dramatically. According to Guardian ad Litem Michael London's 4/19/93 report to the court in Minnesota:
[My observations in discussions with those involved revealed to happy children (Zachary and Jennifer Collins) who have adjusted very well to the changing custody...
Zachary's teacher describes him as more relaxed than earlier in the school year. She finds he laughs and smiles more. She states he used to act out when angry [while in Holly's care] but now acts more appropriately.
Jennifer Rojer of Family Court Services says that Zachary's suicidal behavior only occurred while in Holly's care, and said that Holly's relationship with the children is unhealthy. Rojer reported that during her observations of Mark with the children, the children were comfortable with Mark and affectionate towards him.
In a March 22, 1994 letter to the court, Holly Collins' mother Eleanor Gallagher said that even after custody of the children had been transferred from Holly to Mark in December of 1992, Holly Collins continued to try to turn the children against their father. Gallagher wrote:
Holly is on a crusade. In her relentless quest to regain custody of her children, she continues in subtle ways to undermine the relationship that the children are developing with Mark. Zachary is most affected, and his actions at times mirror his inability to handle the guilt and sympathy feels for his mother. Holly needs to free this boy so that he can be just a kid and not have to carry the weight of Holly's unhappiness.
To read Eleanor Gallagher's letter to the Court, see document #16 here.
Problem #24--Numerous members of Holly Collins immediate family say she has made "a continuing series of false statements" concerning abuse and domestic violence and the children's health during her case in order to deny Mark Collins parenting time with his children.
In a notarized letter to the Minnesota Court of Appeal, Holly Collins mother (Eleanor Gallagher), late grandmother (Mary Therien), stepfather (Tom J. Gallagher), former father-in-law (Gerald W. Collins), and former mother-in-law (Nancy Collins) state:
[I]n Holly's efforts to deny Mark Collins' court-ordered visitation with his children, Holly has attempted to create health problems for our grandchildren by taking them from doctor to doctor until one or more would agree with Holly's thesis that the children's health problems would not permit them to see their father. Holly has attempted to create purported abuse for the same purpose of denying visitation.
Fortunately, court ordered health professionals and the trial judge had seen through this veil of falsehoods and ordered custody to be transferred to their father Mark. The results today are that the grandchildren are healthy, well-balanced, bright and energetic.
To read this affidavit, see document #4 here.
Problem #25--A former mental health professional who observed the Collins family during the case says Holly Collins "manipulate[d] situations and individuals to make herself appear to be victimized and traumatized." She wrote to the Minneapolis City Pages:
I did numerous visitations for Holly and her children and legally documented many of their interactions...What I witnessed was a woman who tried at every occasion to manipulate and break the visitation rules, who felt "above" such stipulations, and I also witnessed and documented a full blown Munchausen's incident with Jennifer that Holly created...
What I do know is that with my advanced degree/education and years of experience working with children, parents and families is that Holly is a highly narcissistic individual who has the education and background to manipulate situations and individuals to make herself appear to be victimized and traumatized...when in fact, the truth of what has and is going on is a bit more complex than she presents...
Holly and Jennifer Collins do acknowledge this woman's role in the case but are critical of it.
Problem #26--Inside Edition filmed a report on the Holly Collins case which was scheduled to air on November 12, 2008. Holly's allies publicized this TV show and Inside Edition put a promo for it on their website. However, Inside Edition postponed airing the show and has apparently decided not air it, possibly due to their doubts about the credibility of Holly Collins.
Problem #27--Hennepin County Family Court Services found that Holly Collins suffers from multiple disorders, including Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy
The Minnesota Court of Appeal supported Minnesota Family Court Judge Michael J. Davis' finding that Holly Collins "suffers from a personality disorder, which may include a disorder in which a parent invents, induces or exaggerates medical symptoms in a child." The personality disorder referred to be Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy (MSbP).
According to a February 22, 1993 Minneapolis Metro/Star News article written during the custody case:
In a custody evaluation, Hennepin County Family Court Services found that Holly Collins suffers from multiple disorders, including Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy...as a result, she was deemed a threat to the children and given limited visitation rights...
Court-appointed child psychologist Susan Devries reported several examples of how the Collins family fits the pattern of Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy...The children saw four allergists in one year for tests. "[Holly] Collins accepts only the most severe test results is valid," writes Devries. Holly claims Mark has forced [the children] to eat foods to which they are allergic. Mark contends that she has overmedicated the children for allergies and asthma.
The children have made allegations of physical abuse by the father, including descriptive drawings by the boy of abuse by his father. "However there is no medical documentation of this abuse in the abuse has not been observed by other neutral parties," Devries states.
The children have had "a remarkable number of doctor visits." The children and Collins herself repeatedly have changed positions and mental health workers in Minnesota and Massachusetts.
The children's illnesses abate when they're with their father. "The children are rarely observed to suffer from asthmatic or allergic reactions while in Mark's presence and have not required any kind of emergency room care or medical treatment," DeVries reports
To read this article, see document #19 here.
Problem #28-- During her custody battle, Holly Collins put forth three individuals to support her claim that Mark Collins abused her. However, none of the individuals were in a position to know whether there was abuse.
During the custody trial, Ronald Tveter, Holly Collins father, testified that in December 1982 he "ran into the respondent [Holly Collins] at a store and observed [Holly Collins] had a bruised nose and a blackened eye. Father Eugene Corica provided counseling to [Holly and Mark] around the time of their divorce, and says that Holly Collins "confided in him she was abused by [Mark Collins]." While there is nothing wrong with Holly Collins including Tveter's and Corica's testimony, neither of them were in a position to know that domestic violence had actually occurred.
As I noted in problem #15, Holly did suffer a nose injury from wrestling with Mark in 1982, but several family members, including Holly's mother Eleanor Gallagher and Holly's grandmother Mary Therien, as well as Gerald and Nancy Ann Collins, Mark Collins' parents, signed a notarized affidavit submitted to the Fourth Judicial Court in Minneapolis, Minnesota in which they stated "Holly received a contusion of the nose in 1982 while in family play with Mark, which was not intentional but solely an accident. Gerald and Nancy Collins and Mark's sister were present in the home when the incident occurred."
To read this notarized affidavit, see document #4 here.
During the custody trial, Karen Skrip also testified on a Holly's behalf as an expert in the field of battered woman syndrome. According to Judge Davis:
Ms. Skrip testified the facts of this case are consistent with a finding of battered woman syndrome. While the court finds Ms. Skrip has extensive experience with battered woman syndrome, her opinion was based on a brief review of documents relative to this case and a recitation of the facts by respondent's [Holly Collins] attorney while she was on the witness stand. Ms. Skrip never spoke with either party, the children or any professional involved in this case.
Problem #29--The mental health professionals involved in the case found Mark Collins to be a good, loving father and do not believe that he fits the profile of an abusive husband or father.
Judge Davis, in his January 26, 1993 amended order in the custody case, reviewed the opinions of the various professionals involved in the case as to Mark Collins' fitness as a parent. According to Davis:
In contrast to [Holly Collins'] allegations, Dr. Cline found [Mark Collins] was "kind, mannerly, patient, and appropriately set limits with the children." He stated [Mark Collins] showed responsible parenting skills during sessions and responded appropriately, cheerfully and patiently with the children...
the Guardian found [Mark Collins] to be calm, cooperative and reasonable to all requests made to him. The petitioner was conscientious in performing tasks, arranging for visitation and transportation. The Guardian found "[Mark Collins'] current behavior does not suggest a violent nature..."...
The Hennepin County Family Court services also conducted a comprehensive custody evaluation in this matter, that included 33 collateral contacts and review of numerous records and documentation. Jennifer Livingston Rojer and Michelle Millenacker of Family Court services conducted the custody evaluation. The evaluators found [Mark Collins] "always appropriately modulated his emotions. He exhibited no behaviors one would expect to find in an abuser."...
The Hennepin County Bureau of Community Corrections, Psychological Services conducted psychological evaluations of [Mark Collins] and Rena Collins.... Ronald Jorgenson, Ph.D. found no evidence of major mental illness or major adjustment problem. [Mark Collins'] response pattern to the MMPI-2 suggested he is "basically happy with his overall life situation and has a positive outlook about the future." He appeared trusting, honest, and responsive to the needs of other people."
Problem #30--Holly says that her ex-husband Mark Collins and his allies "had money, power and fancy lawyers. All I had was the truth on my side." In reality, during both the custody trial and the subsequent appeal it was Mark who was litigating pro se, while Holly had an attorney each time.
To view both court documents, click here and here.
Conclusion
Despite the fact that Holly Collins' claims are disputed by her own mother, grandmother, sister, brother, former in-laws, her ex-husband, his wife, her former boyfriend/father of her 3rd child, his wife, numerous doctors, Guardians ad Litem, social workers, mental health professionals and all seven judges who have heard this case, over the past year Holly Collins has been able to disseminate her side of the case to the media unfettered. There has been little or no effort to look into the other side of the case.
I have done so. The closer one looks at Holly Collins' version of events, the more problems one finds.--Glenn Sacks, 1/27/09
[A note on blog comments--please keep your comments on topic and respectful. Off-topic personal insults directed at Holly and Jennifer Collins will be deleted without notice, and I've already edited out or deleted several. If you see a comment which is inappropriate, please let me know at glenn@glennsacks.com.--GS]
"));
19 queries. 0.758 seconds.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Glenn,
Thanks so much for your hard work in totally blowing the cover of this clearly mentally ill woman, whom noboby should have ever taken seriously.
What a joke, that the DV establishment made her a poster child in a fight against the legitimacy of PAS.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
What can I say other than this is an excellent report!
Keep up the great work.
Bill
January 26th, 2009 at 11:50 pm
Open and shut case. I don't have any doubts and can't see where anyone else could possibly have one, assuming that they were not agenda-driven or flat-out mad.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Glenn, your investigation of this case is an absolute tour de force -- incredibly thorough and careful. In the long, sad history of this case, it is possible that not one of the doctors, social workers, therapists, lawyers or judges has put the entire picture together as completely as you have. Worthy of a Pulitzer!
Alas, past experience suggests that media eager to write front page stories about allegedly victimized women wil continue the Holly Collins saga. Every one of us should bookmark this review and make it our business to send it to any media outlet that propagates the Collins hysteria.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:06 am
Hi Glenn. This was so much information it was hard to absorb. However, it seems clear that the court's decisions were correct. As a "second wife," I can relate to Mark Collins' second wife. She was accused along with everyone else of abuse that very likely never occurred. I was also surprised to see Dr. Newberger's name. I had seen a video link to a Boston-area report on PAS, and Dr. Newberger was the main guest or opponent saying that PAS isn't real. I think several of us who have been on the receiving end of this as "second wives" wrote to him explaining how real, and destructive PAS is to children and their loving parents. Of course he didn't respond.
I don't know how much more evidence of "unfit" there would need to be than is presented here. My heart goes out to Mr. & Mrs. Collins (current) and these poor kids. Someday, they will remember the truth and begin to heal.
I actually felt better to learn that this Munchausen mother was going to do her community service in Holland. I know it's not very friendly to wish bad things on another country. However, I think her service will definitely be better with at least an ocean's distance between her and here.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:09 am
Have a good list of the most offensive media purveyors?
Maybe is it time for a Glenn Sachs and F&F fax, email and phone call campaign.
(to the boards of director of the media) If yes, I volunteer to find out who some of them are.
NYSteve
January 27th, 2009 at 12:26 am
1 thing:
Mark Collin's own testimony about Holly Collins' broken nose injury is highly suspicious. Didn't he claim that it happened while he was rolling over in his sleep? Causing a broken nose, even once, even to a clearly insane woman, doesn't look good. His testimony demands an explanation.
Otherwise, lie after lie is exposed here, nice job.
Having your private life gone over like this on the internet must be horrible, but that's what happens when there's a media circus and your private life gets tangled up with public policies.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:27 am
Glenn,
Were it me I would post this to EVERY media outlet that will run it. Since Jennfier Collins says you owe her mother and herself an apology tell her you will give it if she can disprove any of what your VERY thorough and detailed report has shown. Since you have a relationship with AL Jezaera I would ask one of thier reporters to run an expose on it. Holland has a very large muslim population and I know from my own research that Knaal 64 on Netherlands Digital Sattlite Services carry it.That would put the other side of the story very close to home for her. I have known a good many dutch citizens in my life and while they tend to be VERY liberal they also are an extremely fact based society. If your report was to hit thier airwaves in an expose' Holly Collins would find herself having to answer a great many questions and it just might make the Dutch Government pause the next time something like this happens within thier borders.
Just a thought.
The Court records,affadavits, and reports show a clear history that this woman was intentionally planting false memories in these children and that if I were Mark I would not have allowed her to get off with such a light sentence.
All the courts have done by NOT holding her to a high legal standard is opened the door to others to kidnap children and where to go to get away with it.
Very good work Glenn!!!
The Other Mike D
January 27th, 2009 at 12:37 am
As a follow on to my earlier I would bet you could get Fox to run this and maybe even the tabloids....While I shudder to think what passes for journalistic integrity at the Star or the Sun it would still be nice to see the heat turned up on Holly Collins. Shes ruined both of her husbands lives, Her parents, her children and her siblings lives and has yet to have any REAL consequences.
January 27th, 2009 at 12:47 am
excellent work glenn! thank you so much.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:00 am
Wow,what a history of outlandish claims this woman has.She is simply not credible.Why Jennifer insists there was abuse,I dont know.I guess one can surmise that she was basically coerced or brainwashed by her mother to believe the abuse was really happening.Or perhaps she just feels obligated to help her mother maintain the charade because she loves her.(?)
January 27th, 2009 at 1:01 am
The Other Mike D said:
“She’s ruined both of her husbands lives, her parents, her children and her siblings lives and has yet to have any REAL consequences.”
I came to the same inevitable conclusion – the entire episode is rather tragic. The determined attempt by the father to protect his children has to be admired – it is such a shame that it was in vain.
Perhaps the one bright spot was the refusal of the courts to buy into the hysteria – I am somewhat amazed but certainly impressed.
Hopefully someone will send this URL to Geraldo!
January 27th, 2009 at 1:16 am
Dad in NY Says:
What a joke, that the DV establishment made her a poster child in a fight against the legitimacy of PAS.
===========
Contrary to proving illegitimacy, this is the perfect poster child to prove the legitimacy of PAS.
Jennifer Collins, PAS victim poster child, could there be a better example PAS is not junk science, it really works.
"Jennifer Collins, Holly's now 23-year-old daughter, supports her mother's version of events, and has presented her side of the story in the media."
January 27th, 2009 at 1:31 am
Throughout reading this exceptionally written report, I find myself wondering what the financial cost of this circus was for Mark Collins. Easily thousands. Perhaps tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Maybe one day, Family Court Inc. will get its act together and make it so that any petitioner to family/divorce court who pursues fabricated, malicious or frivolous claims will be made to pay the respondent's legal fees and all associated court costs.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:32 am
As much work as this report took, I am adding my "me too" to the compliments.
It is sad in so many ways that this ill mom has hurt so many.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:55 am
Pat--Holly Collins claimed to suffer an extremely large range of injuries and medical problems, which is part of her psychological disorder. (Despite the long list of injuries I listed in Problem #13, there are many, many more which she claimed in court documents which I didn't list).
During her custody battle years after sustaining the injuries she would claim that these were injuries caused by Mark Collins. Mark Collins sounds confused and clueless when discussing some of these in court because they were never seen as DV incidents by Holly or Mark at the time.
One example is the nose injury, which several other family members stated in sworn affidavits was caused by the two of them playfully wrestling. Eight years later, Holly claimed that this was domestic violence by Mark.
Mark made a mistake by litigating pro se and not taking the DV accusations seriously until it was too late--a mistake I often see men make.--GS
January 27th, 2009 at 2:17 am
Why does such a habitual liar get so many chances to continue to make accusations? Why does the media continue to believe her? Why is this woman not locked up in a mental ward? All she has done is cost hundreds of thousands of dollars of expenses, and destroyed her children, her family, and her ex husband. The really sad part is this happens far too often, and will continue until the courts take a firm stand to stop the abuse, and the media remove the podium that these people use to gain sympathy.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:22 am
The boy cried WOLF once and they came running. The boy cried WOLF again and they didn't believe him. He was ignored.
The girl cried Wolf 50 times, and they came running every time. Instead of punishing her they just tried to figure out why she lied.
why is that?
January 27th, 2009 at 2:33 am
Wow. Thank you.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:42 am
Glenn, not sure if you're aware, but Jennifer's posted an open letter to you:
http://americanchildrenunderground.blogspot.com/2009/01/december-31-2008-my-response-to-mr.html
Most of it is "facts" which have been proven false in this particular post of yours.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:46 am
Thanks for this write up. While my case hasn't gotten to the level of abductions, I like the manner in which this report was completed, which allows one to skim over the finer points, yet still have them available. I'm dealing with a great deal of information, to the point where it becomes tedious and difficult to organize, and hold a reader's attention.
I like the systematic approach. It refutes, solidly, Holly's claims, and completely impeaches her as a witness.
I hope that Jennifer can look at this, and has the opportunity and presence of mind to realize what was done to her by Holly. I know that it would completely undermine her worldview that her mother constructed and reinforced over the years.
It is frustrating (and grossly expensive) to have to meticulously go over it, time and time again, for a new allegation, new court appearance, new Guardian, new counselor, new CPS worker, etc, and many of these people don't have the time and patience. I'm glad to hear that in this case, consistently, the details were looked into, considered, and a decision that's beyond a quick and expedient bit of Solomon-splitting-the-baby type judgement was made.
January 27th, 2009 at 3:04 am
First of all, my compliments go to Glenn for a powerful and well-documented account on this case. One of the amazing aspects is the way this case was handled by so-called professionals in my country and how feminist special interest groups believed her story without any questioning or hesitation. One of the important aspects of the way females handle sexual relationships is how they control the relation, it’s a question of controlling both the behaviour of oneself and the behaviour of the partner. In the US, this was more professionally handled and the court services found out that the perception of Holly did probably not match up with reality. Once she had fled the US, professionals did not even bother to figure out what went wrong with this in Holly’s case. I am inclined to think that being an American also helped her to sell her story. What happened in the Netherlands is also very instructive. Dutch feminists and the media immediately and without any questioning assumed her story to be true and promoted her case as the vivid example of bad men and why good women needed all sorts of protection. It also happened to coincide with a broader negative sentiment about US foreign politics, so it might be of no surprise that this item was picked up by the left liberal media. For me, the whole story is a typical example of extreme and even more unrealistic views, in cooperation with even more aggression, that is driving the agenda of special interest groups, feminists in this case, when the proclaimed goals are reached or have become meaningless. And exactly this phenomenon now has become a driver of parental alienation. Contrary to the belief of feminists, it’s almost a perfect case to explain how feminist’s distortion of reality can become harmful for the children they are supposed to protect.
January 27th, 2009 at 3:28 am
Glenn,
Well done... excellent bit of forensic examination there.
Have you looked at the Villote case yet? Australian dad who had to go to Sweden to try to get his children back (after he told the Australian courts if they let her leave Aus she would kidnap the children and not return)?
I'm working with an attorney on (yet) another International Child Abduction case (this time to Romania), if you'd like to correspond with the father or his attorney I can arrange this.
There's also a case going on re a South African father whose former in-laws abducted the children to India, I can intro you to the principles there also.
Gunner Retired
January 27th, 2009 at 3:49 am
A superb report! Unfortunately those that want to believe Holly are like those who believe in conpsiracy theories - you're part of the cover up.
January 27th, 2009 at 3:49 am
>How could this happen?
Basically, women=good, men=bad
Women don't lie, where there's smoke there's fire, chivalry is not dead, sugar and spice and everything nice etc. etc.
I have suffered through many of the same accusations and alienation in my own case. My ex conjured unbelievable lies and received unbelievable credulity from the legal system and psychologists (all women by the way).
Only one therapist had the presence of mind to label my ex with borderline personality disorder (because her first client out of school was a BPD). Another therapist believed her crap even though the first therapist shared her diagnosis with her directly and warned her about her behavior. Yet another therapist believed her tales of abuse without even speaking to me and was prepared to testify in court about my "abusive and violent nature". It is Incredibly common for therapists to buy into a victim's fantasy without any external validation whatsoever.
Of course, as I have mentioned before, radical feminism does not believe in objective truth anyway because women have "other ways of knowing" based on their "lived experiences". Objective truth is just a convenient construct of the patriarchy that serves to perpetuate man's domination of woman
January 27th, 2009 at 4:08 am
Wonderful work Glenn, thank you!!!!
January 27th, 2009 at 4:24 am
StV,
Familiarize yourself with the name Dr Tana Dineen of BC Can. You may find inspiration in some of her writings.
Gunner Retired
January 27th, 2009 at 5:34 am
Such a thorough research!
The fact that such a weak case can even be used, and nobody dares to challenge them in the mainstream media, just tells me how much control feminism has over the media.
January 27th, 2009 at 5:34 am
I feel very sorry for Jennifer.
It has been proven in research studies that false memories can be implanted in a child or adult and, if reinforced enough, will become 'factual' to that person. As far as she's concerned, she's telling the truth. The problem is that that 'truth' isn't real.
I remember reading about research conducted on a random sample of students who'd been living in London at the time of 7/7. Researchers asked them questions about the London tube bombings and what they'd witnessed.
Not only were the interviewers able to get the interviewees to swear blind that they'd 'seen' or remembered details that were objectively possible to prove false (in this case CCTV footage that didn't exist), but they found that some of them further embellished the original false memories.
See here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/sep/10/humanbehaviour.july7
The Jesuit motto is: "Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man."
Unfortunately it was Holly Collins, rather than Mark, that had the most opportunity to shape Jennifer's upbringing.
January 27th, 2009 at 5:37 am
A piece of investigation which rises to Holmesian heights! I don't think ive ever seen anyone's claims so thoroughly and completely discredited. On the amusement park lawsuit alone her supporters should now drop her case and go home, after all she either misrepresented the truth in order to incriminate her husband or misrepresented it in order to get money from the amusement park. Either way it makes her someone whose word should not be accepted at face value. Brilliant stuff.
January 27th, 2009 at 5:56 am
For what it is worth - since the mother abducted the children and brainwashed them - not all Judges or related personnel are as diligent or competent as Judge Davis clearly was with respect to this particular case.
As a tactic, I am sure the nose contusion in 1982 was supplanted in the child's mind as a vicious attack, perhaps even a sexual attack in nature by the mother and the radical taxpayer funded feminist histrionic revisionists that practice wymyn only perception experts - or BPD for short.
January 27th, 2009 at 6:12 am
Oh where oh where did Holly get all the money to launch suits, travel and move to Europe, ride around and make up complaints, wizz to and from hospitals, retain and pay umteen lawyers, bribe her daughter... ad nauseum ?
January 27th, 2009 at 6:12 am
There is more opportunity for fame and fortune for a woman to claim that they were abused. Jennifer seems to realize that she can capitalize on being a victim rather than an advocate.
With few exceptions (Glenn Sacks, Mike McCormick and a few others), supporting men's issues is not a glamorous undertaking, and even the aforementioned people are subject to more scrutiny than any feminist or DV sympathizer (uninformed) around. Men's rights is in it's early movement.
Jennifer Collins proves parental alienation is real. The brainwashing that a mentally ill parent can do is evident in this case. I feel sorry for this young woman because of the damage that has been done to her. By her mother.
January 27th, 2009 at 6:57 am
It appears PAS is not the problem at all ,here. It appears that lying to the courts is the problem and noone seems to know what the cure is. Can you say PERJURY.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:11 am
The era of personal accountability is passing away. We are quickly entering a world where no one will know what it is like to be held responsible for their own actions. The world of the victim, of act-out, of the naming / shaming media circus.
In a healthy world, for every finger Holly Collins pointed, there would be two pointed back at her. I am very sorry to hear that the media instead has rewarded Holly Collins with all this sympathy, and that no one has looked at it critically, but I can't say I'm surprised.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Congratulations on this incredible piece of investigative journalism, Glenn. Without question, in the years ahead when someone Googles "Holly Collins," they will find this balanced, fair -- and chilling -- account.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Nice Work. It belongs on 60 Minutes.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:28 am
There was no punishment for perjury. This is an example of a get out of jail free pass for women. Lie and perjure and you will be rewarded.
Equal protection under the law means that the victims of perjury are to be protected by the criminal trial and equal punishment to both male and female perjurers.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Under the Hague Convention, the Dutch courts should have send Holly and the children back to the US for the case to be decided there. How did they manage to escape the Dutch legal system for nearly 15 years?
January 27th, 2009 at 9:45 am
This is the prime example that a women in child custoday can say, do, and get away with anything. When she does so aganist a stand up guy. Mark collins for president, any one who can prevail PRO SE in this system is capable of anything (they) set their mind to. Not my opinion that's my experience. Mark is a prime example to all parent's of persistantly doing the next right thing. kid's are worth it !
January 27th, 2009 at 9:46 am
I just linked over to Jennifer Collins weblog and to the follow on links and I find it amazing that all of things she said happened have been refuted by all of the documentary evidence that Glenns investigation went thru in great detail. its almost like she is screaming "HES WRONG..ONLY I KNOW THE TRUTH!!" as loud as she can. Holly Collins has had 13+ years to bend a twist the chidrens image of thier father.
I also find it amazing that HC keeps screaming to the world that "shes" the one who was abused yet her own brother and sister refute that in sowrn testimony and affadavits.
If it were a man he would be in prison...not going on Oprah.
TOMD
January 27th, 2009 at 10:16 am
I have to wonder if there is a way to REWARD these judges for their findings? Obviously not monitarily, but more in a SUPPORT area. Let people know that THIS guy or THESE guys make GOOD decisions.
January 27th, 2009 at 10:26 am
as the kids would say, HOLLY and Jennifer Collins just got PWND!
I hope the whole world reads the truth. I hope all those talk shows and new paper journalists recant and learn to do their @#$@ jobs and investigate before they spew lies!
In fact, why are journalists not held accountable for spewing liees?
January 27th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Glenn, Great report. So many men on this blog have experienced similar action by ex-wives/ ex-girlfriends.
It's unbelievable that feminists want to back this nut job but we are all used to whatever a woman says happened despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The equation for feminists is something like this- 12 experts with overwhelming documentation plus her own families testimony against her or -whatever she says no matter how many times there is no proof, proof to the contrary, or she changed her story.
Well we absolutely have to believe her. Yeah right!
January 27th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Mr. Sachs, I do believe you have the makings of a first class book here. I have never read a case so well documented, you really proved her instability, and pathological behavior. I wonder what the children are doing today, and how they are psychologically. So sad, I hope that your exposure of the case will prevent another parent, male or female from destroying lives.
January 27th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Feminists back nutty people who will help their agenda since they KNOW FOR SURE that the media will not investigate them.
Then if an advocate such as Glenn Sacks looks into things such as the public record and transcipts which are readily available...he is labelled as a nutty zealot.
There seems to be very little REAL journalism taking place IF the subject involves a Politically Correct and therefore protected subject such as women's issues.
January 27th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Being from Minnesota, it was so disappointing to see the wrist slapping that the court let Holly get away with for the kidnapping of these children. But it did reveal the extreme prejudice against men in family court, and criminal court in Minnesota. How these people can sleep at night is beyond me.
January 27th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Glenn, great job! Thank you for your efforts.
Like many have mentioned it seems the underlying problem here is that Holly was never punished for any of her false accusations.
January 27th, 2009 at 11:24 am
it's pat wrote: Mark Collin's own testimony about Holly Collins' broken nose injury is highly suspicious. Didn't he claim that it happened while he was rolling over in his sleep? Causing a broken nose, even once, even to a clearly insane woman, doesn't look good. His testimony demands an explanation.
I can't speak for Mark Collins, but I can tell you that while my nose wasn't broken, my 8-year old son inadvertently blasted me in the face while asleep, bloodying my nose and face with a well-placed rollover shot.
January 27th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Thanks to Glenn for taking the time to write such a thorough and comprehensive rebuttal to this case. This was an absolute necessity in order to place the media in check on such a high-profile and publicly divisive matter. However, those of us who have been on the receiving end of PAS did not even need to read the factoids beyond the initial article itself, because the behavior exhibited here by Ms. Collins is consistently in line with anyone who has ever committed this heinous crime on a child. Since they are some excellent replies entered here, I would just like to make two brief points.
One writer implied that there was the possibility that Mark had really broken her nose intentionally, which now of course seems to be a moot point given the research that's come to light. Let's say for the sake of argument that it was deliberate and he was truly guilty of domestic assault. Does this justify the actions of Ms. Collins? Aren't the lifetime scars of emotional abuse of a child greater than a physical altercation between two adults? This is in no way an advocation of domestic assault, but the point that I am trying to make here is that two wrongs don't make a right. Even amongst those of us who strongly advocate against these custody issues, we still tend to raise our eyebrows when the possibility of DV is mentioned.
Secondly, we need to withhold our judgement of the daughter Jennifer in this case. She obviously has been brain-washed and will be the one who will pay for her mother's selfish actions, by the turbulent emotional life that lies ahead of her. Let's turn our anger and disdain for this young woman into sympathy and prayers for her well-being. Anyone who has witnessed a child victim of PAS grow into adulthood, and the baggage that comes along with the destroyed bond with a parent they once loved, should be understanding of this. All the more reson for us to continue our battle against true villians such as Holly Collins.
January 27th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Brilliant. I wish I had of been able to help. I did some digging, but clearly I am no journalist. Maybe I should get a job at one of the major papers..haha.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Glenn -
Thank you, thank you for taking the time and enormous effort involved in putting this together. As several others have noted, this is unfortunately not an uncommon occurrence. The only thing that makes it uncommon is how well documented the lies were and how well Mark can prove his case. There are too many others who are just as victimized by false allegations and PAS but don't have the smoking gun (or smoking gunS) that are available here.
Now, Glenn, we've all seen you on Fox News and other cable stations - do you have some contacts you can call? Can you get the media to look at this? The truth needs to come out!
And, I hope every reader here will take the time to shoot around the web to different blogs, you tube comments (there's videos on this with the lies presented as truth), etc. If anything good can come from this, it'll be in the truth finally coming out and being widely known!
January 27th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Glenn good job on this. One questions comes to mind is what do the kids have to say now and how are they doing. They are now adults (25 and 23) and it seems like they would want to say that thier father was a good dad. They could do this without saying anything bad about thier mother.
Just a thought,
Ron
January 27th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
amazing work. I wish I could learn how to do something like this. I wouldn't even know where to get started.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Asylum as means by which Holly and the children stayed in the Netherlands?
(Note: I'm unsure whether this has been discussed in other blog entries (except in a post apparently by Jennifer).)
At least two sources (provided in detail later in this post), seemingly including Jennifer, state that Holly asked the Netherlands to grant her and the children asylum, and that the Netherlands granted it (only after an extensive effort, per Jennifer--however, during that time span, they had temporary asylum, which still amounted to not being returned). One of the sources is a news service article re a newspaper article. Part of the article says "The justice ministry told the newspaper that giving asylum to Americans "is not possible." Also per the article, the ministry was "investigating how this could have happened."
The article is from 5/2008. I'm curious if the ministry has publicly stated that asylum was granted, and I'm curious whether there've been any policy changes and whether asylum can be rescinded.
Here is the detail info re the sources.
Malcolm on January 27th, 2009 at 8:57 am asked:
Under the Hague Convention, the Dutch courts should have send Holly and the children back to the US for the case to be decided there. How did they manage to escape the Dutch legal system for nearly 15 years?
(End of quoting Malcolm's post.)
I found two answers, the first one by accident.
I was curious to see if there was a Wikipedia article, and if so, what its content was and whether it had been updated re this blog entry. I didn't look carefully at the search results, but I think that there was no article re her specifically. There was however a mention, that clearly was of her (but perhaps mistakenly stated, I think, that there were three children). The mention was in an article re asylum. The following new article was cited.
http://www.nisnews.nl/public/050408_2.htm
Here are portions of the article.
AMSTERDAM, 05/04/08 - It has now emerged that an American family was given asylum in the Netherlands in 1996. The justice ministry is investigating how this could have happened, newspaper NRC Handelsblad reported Friday.
.....
Collins and her children are according to the newspaper in all likelihood the only Americans ever given asylum in the Netherlands. A judge ruled in 1996 that the family could remain on humanitarian grounds due to the threats of her ex-husband.
The justice ministry told the newspaper that giving asylum to Americans "is not possible." Nonetheless, it happened, NRC Handelsbald insisted.
(End of quotes of the article.)
I then Googled on Asylum, Holly, and Glenn's name, and found a post responding to one of Glenn's other blog entries. The post's author claims to be Jennifer (and probably is, it seemed to me from the post's length and from the details in the short portion I read of it). It says in part:
- We fled the United States and were apprehended in the Netherlands. My mother didn’t know what else to do so she asked for asylum.
- We lived in refugee camps while the Dutch government carried out an extensive investigation.(They were against giving asylum to an American.)
- After 3 years of a scrutiny, the Netherlands Ministries of Justice granted us asylum based on humanitarian grounds. We were the first Americans to be granted asylum in Holland, perhaps the whole European Union!
- After 12 years of living in secrecy in the Netherlands we were found by the FBI, who demanded our deportation.
- The Dutch government asked the FBI to do an investigation to determine 1.) If there was abuse to us in the United States. 2.) If we were telling the truth about the severity of the abuse. 3.) If there was an indication that my mother honestly believed that this was her only option to protect her children.
- The American authorities concluded that all 3 questions were true. (Of course they said that wasn’t reason enough to break the law.)
- The Dutch government decided to stand behind their decision and granted us “Asylum
Indefinitely!”
- The United States eventually dropped all federal kidnapping charges against our mother.
(The post's address is http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3082&cp=6#comment-649053 . Its date and time are "January 2nd, 2009 at 7:59 am ")
January 27th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Glenn,
I read this post with interest . It is a voluminous piece.
I would like to learn more about the specifics of this case and the court proceedings. Could you please provide specific references for the information you provide here so I can learn more?
Thank you so much.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
The article is well reasoned with evidence to support the conclusions.
It is so sad that a person with such longstanding psychological issues has not received the help that she so desperately needs, but as long as the advocate groups support her she will not get help.
Even sadder is the children. They , just like their mother, refuse help and may live their entire lives in fear of imagined abusers.
Saddest yet is that there are minor children still in her home to suffer the same plight.
God help them all.
January 27th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Long post is long. Well fought though, old boy.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Zachary was in an accident in May 1996 in New Hampshire! The hopsital performed x-rays and CAT scans which document that there were no broken bones!!!
This is posted on Jennifer's blog.
If they left the US June 1993 and were in refugee camps for 3 years, how was Zachery in an accident in New Hampshire in 1996??
January 28th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Glen,
Great work! I can totally relate as Holly sounds a lot like my ex who also got off on the "look at me I'm the poor victim" syndrome. When we dated it was her mother, father, sister, and brother in-law who were abusive and who she begged me to take her away from. Then, sixteen years later when she was tired of marriage and wanted a change I magically became the abuser. She obviously did a good job brain-washing those children also. I'd just like to know if it was a man that took those children if he even would have been able to get out of the state let alone the country.
Anyway, people like Holly are sick and need help, but they also need to be kept as far away from children as possible.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
You forgot the Netherlands
On Jennifer's website, she says that Holly filed a complaint against a neighbor for threatening her. This neighbor supposedly was complaining about Holly and her associaties being on welfare and a drag on the local community.
I wonder how many complaints she has made during her time there?
Kudos on following up about the Zachery's head trauma and the mother cashing the check from it and THEN blaming the husband. Amazing! And now her son is brainwashed into thinking his own father did it (even as he both complains he doesn't want contact with him and blames the father for not speaking to him.)
Sadly, this woman really is a model for many women I met in the singles scene who had family problems or issues (two were adopted) and wound up driving away any reliable people in their lives (me being one of them, of course) while complaining about the regular people in their lives who stuck around all being jerks (some of them were, some weren't but were heading for the door like me.) These women were basically toxic to themselves, their children, and those around them.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Glenn,
I think that you've done a great service in exposing the other side of this case. The MSM is clearly biased in favor of women and feminists, so it's very important that our side be available. I think that the strong reaction you're getting is because you are exposing the distortions of truth and flat-out lies that feminists have used in this case, and like the Great and Powerful Oz, they're not happy about it. Feminists have had a monopoly on issues relating to gender, male-female relationships, reproduction, etc., and they don't like giving up power. To them, this truly is all about power - the truth is secondary, and when it doesn't support their message it becomes a threat.
From all of the evidence you've painstakingly provided it seems clear to me that Holly has very serious mental health issues, so I think that the courts have repeatedly gotten it exactly right in this case. For the feminists to use this case as some sort of poster girl for refuting PAS is beyond folly to me. Indeed, I think that correctly portrays Mark as the victim of PAS from a vindictive, mentally-unstable and potentially violent spouse, not Holly.
The feminists are foolish and completely off-base to hang their credibility on this case, but then, feminists don't seem to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction when it comes to these sorts of cases. For them, emotions and empowering women - no matter if the individual woman deserves the power - are all that count.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I think Jennifer should stop talking about things that happened before she was born.
Most parents do not tell all the sordid details of their childhood to their kids, or if they do, it may be sugarcoated.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
[...] To date I have not seen any newspaper, radio or TV reporter or commentator take a close look at the record in the Holly Collins case. I have done so, and there are many problems with Holly Collins' version of the events in her case. Below I list and discuss some of them. Read the rest of this entry » [...]
January 28th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Doh! You said it was in "Holland". Same thing. Oops!
January 28th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
"Glenn, I think that you've done a great service in exposing the other side of this case. The MSM is clearly biased in favor of women and feminists, "
Yes, but the MSM has let Glenn speak and he's always done an excellent job. I'm assuming he's printed this out and sent it to his friends at Fox & MSNBC and it'll soon be discussed in the MSM somewhere (nudge nudge, Glenn....)
January 28th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
K. Schroeder's January 28th, 2009 at 11:46 wrote in part:
"If they left the US June 1993 and were in refugee camps for 3 years, how was Zachery in an accident in New Hampshire in 1996??"
I'm certain that the underlying answer is that though Jennifer wrote "1996" as the date of a car accident and resultant hospital treatment, she meant to write 1986. (To confirm this, please read the full blog entry. Its argument regarding an allegation of events in 1987depends on the accident-and-treatment's having been **prior to** 1987.)
January 28th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
I find it very disturbing that the "baby" she left with has been kept from HIS father for the entire time she was in the Netherlands.
I couldn't stand the thought of never getting to know my child because his mother has decided he can just be taken away due to some other fabrication of events she has with previous relationship.
I had a son who was taken from me through death because of someones carelessness and it is hard enough to have to live with tragedy without nonsense like this. am also a mother of another son. i am a step-mother and a grandmother. I would be horrified to think i could not see ANY of these children again.
I have dealt with other women who have tried to keep kids from their fathers. It is not a happy situation and leaves the father very distraught and helpless.
I feel bad for Mr. Imm and his family. Shame on Holly for not making some kind of arrangements to allow the youngest boy to maintain a relationship with his father. I have myself grown up without a father again because of death and I was too young to remember him. I have always had a void in my life because of it. I have nothing but contempt for someone who would keep a child from his father for selfish reasons.
January 28th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
We can all quote the evidence and argue the points over and over. The fact is that nothing will change unless Holly decides that she does not want her illness to affect her children any longer. She has to decide that she loves them more than her fantasy.
Holly needs to remember that the children are always most important, and her selfish tales hurt everyone involved. She needs to own up to her lies, then shut up and let the children form their own relationships with their respective fathers.
Jennifer and Zachary, please please look objectively at what was written here. Please get help. You can still love your mother but understand her illness and the effect it has had on you.
Holly, your youngest (Imm's son) needs to know that he was loved, but due to a situation beyond his control his father could not share his younger life with him. You must allow him to know his father without anyone telling him how he feels or poisoning his relationship with his father.
Unless you do this Holly, you will have yet another bitter child who thinks the world is out to get him. Don't make him share your illness.
January 28th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Kay, you assume that Holly has self-awareness of her illness. The problem is that so doesn't think she is sick - the rest of the world is the one with the problem!
January 29th, 2009 at 9:01 am
If the head injury was caused by the father slamming his head into the wall, why isn't this written on the ER report? Wouldn't the ER Dr's have to report this immed to children's services and wouldn't the child have been taken immed into protective care?
January 29th, 2009 at 9:15 am
http://rad.usuhs.mil/medpix/master.php3?mode=single&recnum=1543&table=card&srchstr=&search=
Everyone go to this link: leptomeningeal cyst
January 29th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Glenn kudos on the detail work. This is probably the worst fight you have picked, in the sense that the other side is ferocious in its attacks. Please be aware of that.
January 29th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I realize that she doesn't think she has a problem. I also know that she is probably reading these blogs daily as is Jennifer and the boys.
One can always hope that she will recognize that she has a problem and will get help for herself and her children.
K Schroeder has a good point. Look at the xray report that Holly or Jennifer posted. The two pages scanned are signed by different doctors. They were scanned to lead you to believe that they are page one and page two of the same document. They are not. Wonder what is hiding on the real first page?
I followed the link. Serious stuff, the cyst. If the father had hurt the child in this fashion, he certainly would have been jailed.
January 29th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
.......But the report says an anterior depressed skull fracture. That's the front of the head. Consistent with flying forward and striking his head on an amusement ride. Without more information, this document does not mean that there was abuse, nor does it mean that he was injured in an amusement ride incident. THis report only shows that something happened. He could have fallen down stairs, fallen out of a bunk bed...etc.
The report does not have page 1: the S and O. It has page 2 only which contains the A (he has it as impression instead of assessment) and plan. The xray report and page two are scanned together to make it look like they belong together as page one and two. Notice the dates on the bottom of each of the pages. They are different dates. Notice also the MD that signed each page. Different guys. You only see what she wants you to see.
It does say that there is past history of post concussion syndrome, but you would want to see all of the medical to determine what that means. Sometimes when they say past history, they mean for the past week or month or whatever.
Of great concern to me is the possible leptomeningeal cyst. Very serious if the diagnosis was confirmed. Would require surgical repair. The condition as I read it is pretty rare but does occur in a child with a skull fracture. Below is the link to the article that I read on it.
http://www.drhull.com/EncyMaster/L/leptomeningeal_cyst.html
Another Link that talks about the time frame for it to develop:
http://rad.usuhs.mil/medpix/radpix.html?mode=single&comebackto=mode%3Dgeo_browse&recnum=1543
The amusement ride accident was 5/10/86. The xrays were 7/16/87.
If he had the cyst and it was not repaired, Zachary would or could have suffered from seizures, retardation, and increased intracranial pressure (headaches?). This is not something that they would have taken lightly. If this actually was diagnosed, Holly would have had a field day, she would have sued for more than 50,000.00 and certainly would not have accepted only 50,000.00 in a settlement. This would have been a serious diagnosis that she would have pursued vigorously given her munchausens.
Furthermore, most states have laws in place that state that if they suspect child abuse, they have to report it as such to the police/child services, someone. I realize that this was back in 1987, but I think those laws may have been in place back then. It would be interesting to see if the hospital made any report to the police or anyone. It would also be interesting to see if the laws were in place at that time.
January 29th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
anyone hit up DR Phil yet? This seems like a classic story he would do.
You have a parent who kidnaps a child, You have abuse, you have the child many years later coming back and obviously in need of serious degrograming. You also have a half assed media circuss that has made this villian of a mother out to be a hero.
Or would Dr Phil simply have That Gloria lady on there who would argue that water isn't wet?
January 30th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
[...] Glenn Sacks, a leading father's advocate, recently published a carefully crafted piece about the latest cause celebre of the tyrants on the far feminist left who give the rest of us right-minded women who think feminism is supposed to be about . . . uh . . . equality? Yeah, that's it, equality. Anyway, both she and they give us all a bad name when they support folks like this Holly Collins woman. In his piece Glenn breaks down the more-than-twenty-year case in detail. After reading it, you'd have to agree that Holly has finally gotten what she's been looking for all these years . . . a spot in the limelight where everyone will feel sorry for her: Controversial Holly Collins Custody Case. [...]
January 31st, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Excellent work and details of Glenn. No wonder you are not invited to a TV show about this case. You know too much, Glenn, so lets work that you appear at least on one of them.
This is a typical PAS case.
February 1st, 2009 at 8:50 am
Jennifer is responding in her blog. She is claiming now that Holly's parents have somehow used their wealth and power to get Glen to write this article and that same wealth and power have changed the facts. She then shows a grainy picture (allegedly) of her Grandparents riding in buggy. What's that about? Is she trying to identify them to the people that support Holly in hopes that one of them is crazy enough to do them harm? What is her motivation by showing that picture? If this is her only evidence that they have abused their alleged power, then she missed her mark.
She again prints parts of two different medical records as evidence of abuse. Again I say, what do the other pages say? Again, she is showing us what she wants us to see.
Her latest blog is the ranting of a woman whose psychological age is that of a young teen at best: If I yell loud enough and cry no fair enough, then everyone will believe whatever I say.
The evidence as posted in this piece speaks volumes, as does the "evidence" in Jennifer's blog.
February 1st, 2009 at 3:36 pm
[...] a friend showed me this blog by Glenn Sacks, which takes a very in-depth examination of the Collins case and provides court documents for [...]
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:08 am
I, along with others here, believe this story needs all the attention the media can muster. I don’t think there’s a better case that illustrates Parental Alienation. As Jennifer keeps stating (almost mantra like) the truth is finally coming out.
That fact is in a criminal case you are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This case is a civil matter so the threshold is by the preponderance of evidence, a much lower threshold. Every judge she came before ruled she hadn’t met that bar.
If you read Glenn’s original story and the 2 additional follow-up stories and put them up against Jennifer’s (Holly’s) several responses on her website, the one thing, and the most important thing, is that Jennifer has provided absolutely no independent evidence that supports the astonishing number of claims these women make. It seems Jennifer (Holly) believe that making increasingly bizarre accusations supplements a lack of evidence.
Jennifer seems to think posting x-rays of two visits to the emergency room is proof positive that Mark Collins abused his kids. Nothing indicated any kind of abuse. As someone else has mentioned, there would be something. In fact these x-rays only raise further questions. Jennifer’s heading on one post is “Holly Collins Proof that Son’s Skull was fractured in 1987” is a great example of the above.
One puzzling issue is the 1st x-ray of Zachary’s skull from Boston Children’s. It’s addressed to a doctor in San Antonio, apparently Zachary’s patient. What’s up with this? Also, this Program Note isn’t signed; who was this physician and where’s the rest of the documents; it mentions Cranial Nerve exams 2 through 12?
To add to another commenter here are a couple of oddities from the MN ER report;
1. Depressed skull fracture secondary to recent neurological trauma.
2. No evidence of intracranial injury.
That the skull fracture is secondary at this time and no injury of intracranial injury it appears the skull fracture happened sometime between the kiddy park accident and this visit to the ER.
3. Possible leptomenigeal cyst.
4. Past history of post-concussion syndrome.
Sorry to be technical but I suspect Holly counts on others not to dig deeper;
Leptomenigeal is technically the Meninges and in this case the Arachnoid Mater, which can (and is suspected to) lead to an Arachnoid Cyst.
Here’s the definition of Arachnoid Cyst;
Arachnoid cysts are cerebrospinal fluid covered by arachnoidal cells and collagen[1] that may develop between the surface of the brain and the cranial base or on the arachnoid membrane, one of the three membranes that cover the brain and the spinal cord.[2] Arachnoid cysts are a congenital disorder,[3] and most cases begin during infancy; however, onset may be delayed until adolescence.[2]
Note: Congenital Disorder and may be delayed.
Next, Post Concussion Syndrome is;
The condition can cause a variety of symptoms: physical, such as headaches (this is why Holly brought him to Boston Children’s), cognitive, such as difficulty concentrating; and emotional and behavioral, such as irritability. As many of the symptoms in PCS are common to, or exacerbated by, other disorders, there is a risk of misdiagnosis. Though there is no treatment for PCS itself, symptoms can be treated; medications and physical and behavioral therapy may be used, and patients can be educated about symptoms and their usual prognosis.
Remember Zachary’s reported suicidal behavior (emotional and behavioral) e.g. banging his head on the floor/wall. Holly herself stated he began banging his head against the floor after talking with Mark and why she brought him to the ER in the first place. According to sworn testimony this behavior stopped after custody was switched to Mark.
Now how hard would it be for a (manipulative) mother, diagnosed with Munchausen, to plant and continually reinforce false memories. As an adult Zachary has yet to make a public statement supporting either Holly or Jennifer Again, Jennifer posts a letter supposedly written by Zachary on her website as “proof”. I can’t help but wonder if Zachary fully understands his diagnosis from when he was 4.
February 2nd, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Glenn -
Sadly, Jennifer is now geared up to make her life a great tragedy and painting herself into the "I am just a poor victim" corner so it can be expected that she will imitate her mother and blame everyone else for all of her mistakes and disappointments in life. One can only hope that she will choose not to have children of her own who can be regaled with their concocted history of family abuse. She is already begging the world to ignore any truth and factual evidence to perpetuate her mother's delusions. Perhaps she truly believes the fairy tales her life has been based on and this, too, is sad because she can never move forward emotionally until she can accept the fact that the psychological abuse her mother heaped on her is dealt with.
You have made it very clear "What Really Happened?", just as the courts and the majority of experts clarified years ago. Holly Collins victimized everyone close to her and has so isolated her children from any form of reality that they may never be able to function in society with any form of trust or companionship. I would predict that one of two things will soon happen: First, the media outlets will finally have to face the fact that they've been scammed and choose not to give this woman any more outlet for her delusions; or, second that at least one brave outlet will apologize for helping perpetuate the fraud and present the truth.
I see this story repeated every day by women encouraged by the DV shelter manuals and "delegates" and by those supporters who buy into the drama. There is an old adage, "If you're right you're right and if you're wrong be wrong at the top of your voice!". Holly Collins has trained at least her daughter to carry on her crusade in being "wrong at the top of her voice". The children "assume" that mom wouldn't lie and that the stories are true since there is the appearance of support for mom's stance. Jennifer Collins says the US government told the Dutch government that the abuse is all true but one must only presume that this is the story mom told her since it is obvious a lie.
Too often no one bothers to get the "rest of the story". What is crystal clear in this story is that had anyone bothered to even attempt to examine the case history there would have been no media attention beyond the report that she had been finally caught and perhaps a discussion about the vast harm done to the children. Anyone who thinks PAS is indeed not a legitimate problem need look no further than Jennifer Collins to recognize what the pattern of behavior leads to. She will never be able to accept the fact that it was her mother who made her a victim and she may never be able to grow emotionally beyond the victim mentality so deeply instilled in her.
A story like this one just makes me fight harder for my own clients. I get to see the results when the pattern is broken and the kids can recover before becoming so enmeshed in the false drama that they may never find their way back to the loving, caring extended family that is so cruelly taken away by a vengeful parent. The courts saw through Holly Collins game and at least tried to break the pattern of abuse by giving the children to the target parent, where from all the evidence says they were thriving in the nurturing, loving environment. Unfortunately, an obsessed mother with a cold, calculating gameplan saw fit to damage her children's mental health beyond repair.
I do feel sorry for Jennifer Collins because she is so deeply mired in her mother's delusions that she may never be able to face the truth and move past the lies to a normal life. It appears that she is very comfortable being a victim and will in turn victimize others until she gets valid therapy. She may never be able to confront her mother and get the bald truth because Holly Collins believes her own fiction and in turn will never be able to face her children with apology or regret.
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Judi, I don't doubt that your pity for Jennifer is sincere but that's perhaps, cancel that, clearly why she has a problem. She's a victim of playing the victim and the only way out of that paradigm is for someone to call her on it. Both Holly, and now Jennifer, are grown women and they are responsible for the damage they do to others. Her father's wife, for example, has done NOTHING to her to justify the cruel taunts she makes towards her on her blog.
Ann Coulter has a new book: "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America" and this is a perfect example of an abuser playing the victim role both for themselves and claiming to be advocates for others. From all the evidence Jennifer herself has posted, we only know that her brother's head was harmed in her mother's care at the amusement park AND at her home when her son supposedly banged his own previously injured head on the floor.
That brings us to the one true victim in all of this: Jennifer's brother Zachery. If he tries to play the victim game as a man in the USA, nobody is going to shed tears for him. As a child, he was a tool for his mother but as an adult, he's going to get nowhere fast with that attitude. What kind of life is he going to lead?
February 4th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Glenn
Thank you so much for telling the real story about Holly Collins. It is so sad to see all of the attention given to a woman who is using the media and Women's Abuse groups to further her self. But the really sad part is how this woman is manipulating her children to join her. First Jennifer and now Christopher. Jennifer's blogsite is proof Holly is passing Muchausen by Proxy on to her daughter. And to think there are 4 to 5 more children, after Christopher, who must suffer this abuse. I would like to see the attention shifted to taking these children from this obviously very disturbed woman. I hope City Pages and Inside Edition read your work and expose her for the fraud she is. I certainly hope the anti-abuse groups turn their attention to women who really are in need of their help, and do a better job of uncovering the whole truth.
February 4th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
I don't know Mark Collins or his wife, but I cannot imagine the hell Holly Collins has brought to their life. My condolences to them. My hope is you find peace now.
I do know Jeff Imm. He is a wonderful upstanding person. He is an involved father. A loyal husband. He is the kind of person you would want in your own family. He is honest, kind, inteligent, funny, and has a huge heart. He works hard and is the kind of person who is always willing to help out. A great outdoorsman, sportman and very involved parent. It is a tragity Christopher is missing out on this relatationship. They never had a chance because of this one womans selfishness. Shame on her.
I hope the authorities step in and deal with her before she is allowed to destroy another family.
What of the father of the 4/5 younger children. What is that story. (The truth please)
I believe Holly Collins should be put in jail for taking Christopher, Zach and Jennifer out of the country. She should be treated like the criminal she is. She has denied all these mentioned families their children and grandchildren. She has trashed her own mother and family.
Some one needs to stop the carnage this woman ravages upon these poor families
February 5th, 2009 at 12:11 am
On Jennifer's blog (whoismyrealdad.blogspot.com/): "My brother has a special request: He is curious what his father and his wife look like as well as grandparents, aunts, uncles, whoever shows up from his father's family. Since his father will not send him any photos, he was wondering if anyone would take a picture for him."
Then later, we discovered why: "This is an old photo of my biological father. I kept it in a frame by my bed. He looked like a nice guy. Now I see his new photos. He looks like a fat, lazy slob." Yep, real nice boy that Holly has raised there.
The blog is obsessed with the boy's trust fund provided by the father with $70G in it for his "education" and accuses the father simultaneously of being a "deadbeat dad." The blog also is obsessed with the boy complaining he doesn't want to see his father again, ever (with numerous profanities including "Beth Imm is a Crazy Bitch! I HATE HER! You F*** Up Now!" and also complains that the father doesn't answer the phone along with other relatives also not wanting to contact him. (Who can blame them.)
Summer, I wonder if it would be constructive if the father simply didn't try to play nice with them and to impose a self-inflicted gag order while the other side bashes his reputation online. Let him have his $70K trust and blow it away in under 2 years (it wouldn't last that long in the states or even overseas.) In addition, notify the Danish authorities that with the boy flush with cash, he can pay for his own apartment and education rather than claiming poverty on the local taxpayers' dimes...
February 5th, 2009 at 12:33 am
PK -
I do, sincerely, feel sorry for the children caught up in this tyranny by a mother. However, having said that, I absolutely do not have sympathy for the adult child who attempts to completely ignore the truth and continues the charade as this young woman is doing. I have a notion that she may be seeking a financial windfall, as in selling her tale to some producer for a cheap movie of the week or getting someone to ghostwrite a story to market on Oprah.
Calling her on it only fuels her obsession. What she needs is intensive psychiatric deprogramming where she can finally confront and accept the truth. I am sure that my comments will no doubt only fuel her hatred of the truth, but these cases need exposed for what they are. The truly sad part, which I have already stated, is that in this case the courts "got it" and saw through the lies. However, that most certainly did not help Dad and did not save the children from the indoctrination. This case is a textbook example of why the courts need to pay attention early in the "game" and to do everything possible to prevent the parent from being able to remove the children from the country.
I think what fits Holly Collins is "depraved indifference" to the well-being of her own children. She fancies herself a heroine and has her own cheering squad, children still so tied to the delusion that they cannot think for themselves or grow emotionally beyond the age they were when they were abducted. Yes, I pity the children and I pity their children whose legacy will be a familial history based on a monumental lie. Jennifer Collins knows she and her siblings weren't abused by Dad and cannot accept just how badly her mother has damaged her.
February 5th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Advice
Judi, that's why I'm worried that both fathers, who are largely trying to put all of this behind them are instead viewed as prey by these women whose "family business" is to exploit fathers, children and the welfare state. That's how they support themselves (if we can call that "support".)
Mark Collins is quoted by a newspaper as saying he's happy that there's "closure" but it's clear that's the last thing Holly or Jennifer want. Holly wrote that she doesn't want to be considered a martyr (which is her passive-aggressive way of showing that's exactly what she wants) and Jennifer appears to be setting her up for the lottery payout: a movie on Lifetime.
What stands in her way, though, is that she may have a hard time staying in the states due to custody battles over their shared child with Jeff Imm. That was a second loose end and she probably can't go on her talk show tour until that's cleaned up. So they're trying to go on a publicity campaign to demonize this father. The son, Christopher, appears to be a dupe encouraged by the mother to use vile curse words to attack the fathers in an attempt to be cute. Jennifer proudly displays horrific colored pictures of children demonizing their fathers and new wives/girlfriends. Christoper says: "When I was little my mom told me my father was young. He was not ready to be a father. " The record shows that's clearly not true. The father fought for custody and, unlike the mother, actually put money up for his future rather Holly who went on welfare. Christopher is clearly too immature and emotionally manipulated by his mother though to see this clear paradox.
Jennifer appears to be panicking somewhat on her blog because she may be worried that if Holly can't move over soon on go on the tour or start up a new welfare household, then she might have to get a real job. She may even be shopping around for some dupe at school from a wealthy family to knock her up. Hopefully young wealthy college aged men today are more wary than 20 years ago when unwed motherhood among white women was still somewhat rare.
To Jennifer or Christopher (either of which who are reading this), both of the above men put up their actual, real money to raise their children and to try to provide a household for you. After Holly left their lives, they moved on. On the other hand, the ONLY constant in Holly's troubled, miserable existance and that of her custodial children is Holly herself. Holly is a professional victim. Until Zachery and Christopher FULLY clean up their acts, Mark Collins and Jeff Imm shouldn't meet with them. That's the FIRST thing they need to do as men. They are not in a position, based upon their mother's and their own actions, to set terms of future meetings and contact. Both Zachary and Christopher are crying for their fathers to talk to them even as they spit in their fathers' eyes. Welfare mothers such as Holly can get away with that kind of behavior, but not young men. That's the word up.
Mr. Mark Collins and Jeff Imm should write a book, even a set of notes, as soon as possible, and then PUBLISH them even for a hundred dollars and register the copyright. That should help to keep Lifetime TV away from it more than any notion of professional ethics which is a joke in that industry. It's possible, though, that with even the courts in disagreement with these women that Lifetime may be concerned about possible legal sanctions if they go through with it.
February 5th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
It came to me while reading the emails between Jeff Imm and Christopher that there is no way to be able to tell who actually wrote them. I'm not convinced that Christopher wrote them. If he did, you can see the influence that Holly has had on him. If my teenage son spoke and acted like that he would be grounded or otherwise punished. That is not behavior that a good mother would allow.
Also, remember, these are the emails that Holly allowed us to see. Again, we only see what she wants us to see. I'm sure there are emails by Jeff that support the idea that he is a caring and loving person as Summer has said that he is.
Jeff Imm is right not to go to see Christopher. I wonder what legal procedings are waiting for him if he enters that country.
Why is Holly trying so hard to entice him to go there to see Christopher?
All of these children may be beyond hope. They are so convinced by Holly that everyone is out to get her and them, that there may be no way to help them any longer.
PK, you are right about Christopher's quest to get pictures of his father, stepmother and their children. Notice what they did with the one grainy picture they had of Holly's parents. They want to be able to identify them for some reason. Are you suspicious? I am. They can't be trusted. There will always be an ulterior motive for Holly and I dont' think that behavior is above any of her children given who rasied them.
Mark and Jeff need to watch their backs and their family's backs.
February 5th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Kay, The previous cartoons that Zachary made for Holly's hand-picked therapist are disturbing to say the least and not for the reason she thinks. Holly was proud of her son hitting his head on the floor in an attempt to "protect" her and encouraged both of her sons to threaten to run away rather than go for custodial visits.
I think most of the material we see are real although highly edited as you point out. Even the ones she produces aren't as damning as she claims. Jeff Imm, for example, says that he told his family to not get involved and the wife did in a blog later on. The son's correspondence indicates that he was told, by Jennifer, that Jeff's wife was "attacking" his mother (note the hysterical term) and that therefore made his father the villan. Holly (through Jennifer) is grasping at straws.
It hadn't occurred to me that there was a pattern to Christopher's pleas (which are clearly him being manipulated by Holly and Jennifer) asking for Jeff Imm to come to Holland. Good catch! Clearly, when members of Jeff's family sent his photograph and that of his wife to them, they immediately leared at his photo (really low class move.) For the record, Jeff looks like a nice, kind hearted middle aged man. Christopher will be lucky if time is so kind to him 20 years hence. Anyways, good catch and I wonder if maybe Holly was looking to play one of her terrified death threats games and claim that she just got off the phone with him and he threatend to kill her and her son and to get the son to attack him (reminds me of the legend of Hercules) and/or then to call the authorities and get him busted for harassment or being a "deadbeat" dad. Holly might even have a secret restraining order against him.
I noticed that Jennifer is trying to push a button by going onto blogs and bashing Jeff's wife for an alleged dual DUI record (over a period of years.) She had to have either heard that from somewhere or gone through police records. (probably the latter.) So the nice, "shy" Holly and/or Jennifer and son call up different relatives and get all sweet and nice and talk about their difficulties and fished for information and that's what came up in their net.
When reading Christopher (and Zachery's) conflicting pleas for the parents to be "real men" and contact them and then turn around and scream vile curses to go away and fish for information from other paternal relatives, it came across as a clear pattern maybe similar to what Holly herself had done before. In addition, Glenn's research on the case above discusses Jennifer's pattern of playing passive-aggressive victim games similar to her mother (crying if she doesn't get a ball during playtime.)
Funny observation: I was reading the other blog dedicated to bashing Jeff Imm and it includes a letter from Holly to Jeff saying she had won her case (nyah nyah nyah) dated the beginning of December saying she was off to Paris. (I thought immediately to myself: If Jeff knew this, he should have contacted interpol and gotten her picked up!) Holly said she wasn't going to respond to messages until she got back January 5th. Then, January 2nd, she wrote a nasty email with a sneer thank you for his presents and that the boy didn't want to write to him (even as the boy screams on the blog that the father doesn't pick up the phone). Finally, Jennifer and Holly are in a positive rage that an arrest warrant was posted in mid-January for Jennifer for skipping out of town (Don't have a victory dance on Oprah just yet, baby.)
Kay says: "Mark and Jeff need to watch their backs and their family's backs."
PK responds: I agree. Christopher's repeated phone calls to Jeff Imm which are probably just teasers to get information, for example, are outright harassment. I was thinking about the merits of suggesting they file a charge of harassment against Holly's household but also setting the phone to voice mail and seeing what happens. I had a psycho ex girlfriend who was bothering me and I did that and she left a massively incriminating threat. After that, she knew she was nailed and left me alone. In theory, simply keeping Christopher in Amsterdam isn't an option. Holly has provided (or lied) to the Danish government no reasonable argument to grant safety amnesty to Christopher. The conditions on the much beloved $70K trust fund that Holly is drooling over allows him to use that money to pursue her and get Chris back. That's a good sum to pay a lawyer to do just that. It's possible that's already happening (the arrest warrent two weeks ago...) and hence the hysteria from Holly as expressed through Christopher. She had that money already counted! Maybe that's why Jeff has gone mum... Everyday that goes by, that "child" support is being used against her. God has a sense of humor.
February 5th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
It is nice to see all the messages from people who want to see both sides. In our society there are to many jumping onto the 1st side they hear. Right or wrong. I liked the advise from others for the fathers. We can't pretend to know what it is like to walk in their shoes. And I think they need our support in staying strong and following the right course. I commend them both for showing their sons how true fathers act and leading by example. I feel for their families. This kind of circus shouldn't be allowed. The media is using these people to for their own gains. I wonder if they looked into why the neighbors in the Netherlands turned her into the authorities. And I am confused about the number of children. I have read 10 and 7 and 8. Will they all come here? Is there a father (or 2) coming with. How would he handle his children being taken from him. Did he believe Holly's stories. How did she explain. I really hope we here in America do not give her fame and fortune on the backs of the many families that she and Jennifer have attacked. In the end we all have to answer for our actions. To Zach and Christopher, we here in America think your dads are who you really want to be like. I hope when your adults and the noise has settled down, you take time to see what truly great men your dads are. Until then God Bless and keep you safe
February 6th, 2009 at 9:31 am
The last entry on Christopher's site is dated earlier this week.
"My biological father Jeff Imm wrote to me for the last time on October 28 2008. He said:
"It's important that you know that I believe that the gag order is important for this to be worked out. I don’t think working out our problems in the media will do you any good and I promise you will not see anything from me or my family."
Jeff Imm broke his promise again!
His wife (Beth Imm) keeps saying bad S... about my mom on another website.
His bitch wife (Beth Imm) sent documents to a reporter (Glenn Sacks) and he posted them on the internet. Beth Imm gave the reporter private information about my mom being raped. He printed it for the whole world! I read it at school! I HATE THEM ALL!
My mom is a nice person. She loves kids. She is good to me! Jeff Imm does not want to be my father. He does not want to have to pay for me.
Beth Imm is a Crazy Bitch! I HATE HER!
You F*** Up Now!
I will never go with the Imms!
(Sorry Grandpa Ron, I know you get mad when I use bad words.)
Posted by childrenunderground at 1:23 PM
Thursday
Here's the deal. I don't see Beth Imm's name anywhere here on this blog. Obviously she or anyone else can write here anonymously. Also, I doubt that Glen Sacks is Beth Imm's pawn and was instructed by her.
So, how can Christopher say that Beth is writing "bad s..." here and that she had any hand in Glen Sacks writing this article. Jeff did not lie.
Furthermore, if the document about rape was not known before, he made it public knowledge.
Christopher is simply making things up in order to incite and try to bring Beth, Jeff, Mark or his wife out in hopes that they do or say something that Holly can use against them. They are smart to keep quiet. Holly and her brood....not so smart.
Again, the rude and immature nature of the writing by Christopher shows me that he really has been influenced so negatively by his upbringing, that there may be no hope for him. Where is his concerned mother? Why is she allowing him to present to the world this way? Is this child so out of control that she cannot convince him to stop embarrassing himself in a very public manner? Or is someone else writing it pretending to be him?
PK, good point about the trust fund money. Use it all up. Somehow the other children are getting through college, Christopher could follow their lead.
Regarding her email stating she was going to Paris for vacation. Did you notice that first she talks about how certain things weren't in her "budget", then later talks about going on vacation to Paris. Can you imagine the cost of that trip with that many children? So which is it, are you broke or are you able to take a family of 10 to Paris?
Did you see that on some of the activist web sites there is an option to donate to Holly? I wonder how much money she earns there, and whether the government would want to tap into that to repay the welfare that they have provided for so long.
February 6th, 2009 at 10:51 am
I see now on Jennifer's blog that she has cut off the Dr report that suggests a meningeal cyst on the head injury. She must have looked that one up and seen that that type of diagnosis may be caused by a prior injury! Also, the documents for Jan 1, 1983 and Jan 4,1983 are only small partial scans again. Where is Holly's name ? Why can't she show the whole document?
February 9th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Glenn Looking at all of this, I am really glad you looked into this case. Coming from a background of having a mother with psychotic tendencies. This sounds very familiar. The best thing that could happen to these children would be removing them from this woman. I can attest to the life long trauma and distrust toward other humans because of this influence. And I myself's life was never put on world wide display. From the sounds of Christopher's rant, he is obviously very immature. I have a 16 year old and she would never display herself in this light. Either someone is else is writing this or this is christopher is crying for help. I hope he gets it. And I hope no one is foolish enough to donate money to this cause. I hope Holly finds another countries welfare program to support her. She obviously doesn't think Dads are important. In America Dads are just as important. And thank you for supporting us.
And if there is someway to donate to the other side of this fraud of justice, let me know. I would be happy to help fight this crap. And I know my friends feel the same way.
February 10th, 2009 at 11:00 am
I see now that they are trying to make Bianca look bad on Jennifer's page. (If that is Bianca) It is obvious that Jennifer and Holly are trying to entice Beth and Jeff out of their silence. I hope they don't take the bait. By the way, Bianca is beautiful. Holly and Jennifer are obviously jealous, they can only dream of being that beautiful.
And what a "kind, sweet person" Holly is to instigate or allow that Bianca is now brought into this. Show some class.
An alleged copy of an email from Holly to Jeff is also on the page. In that alleged copy Holly states that Jeff can give up his parental rights and keep the trust fund money. The money is not hers to give.
She let a little bit of the cat out of the bag in that email. She mentioned that Jeff cheated on her. Is she so sick that 16 years after the fact she is still trying to get revenge on someone that cheated on her? (If that ever happened either, we can't believe anything she says)
By the way Jennifer and Holly, I am not Beth, or anyone else that is involved in this situation. I am simply someone that is astonished at how low people will go to get attention.
February 10th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
For the record, Jennifer, I am not Beth Imm and this can be proven easily by the fact that I have posted under the PK pseudonym on glennsacks.com, mensnewsdaily, and other forums for the past 4 years on a variety of men's rights and conservative topics. Unless you want to claim I made thousands of postings during that time as a cover to diss you on this blog.
I found it amusing that Jennifer's blog entry on the page going after her biological father: "[Holly] is raising 10 children by herself (biological and adopted) and all 10 of her of children are excelling. " AND in the other page attacking the Jeff Imm: "I think you should know that Christopher is asking the court to allow his Papa to adopt him. As soon as the paperwork is completed we shall have it served upon you."
Nice way for Jennifer to give credit to "papa",eh? He doesn't even exist when she plucks the harp strings for her lone, single mother (living off of Dutch welfare.)
February 10th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Pot, meet kettle
Jennifer wrote on her blog: "What kind of people interfere in someone else’s life, dig up as much information about them, twist the evidence and do everything they can to try to disprove that 2 little children were telling the truth about being abused? It’s pathetic. Why don’t you just mind your own business?"
PK responds: Jennifer, it's amusing that after preaching about the merits of minding one's own business and not attacking "little" children, you then trash talk your step-sister: "Bianca had to learn about sex by watching Porno? - Great Parenting there Beth & Jeff! "
Gee, what a surprise. You have a gripe against everyone that dares to disagree with you including silly court appointed therapists and lawyers. Oh, except for the few your mother doctor-shopped that you then proclaim prove all of your claims.
News flash here: Simply putting up a 6 inch or so except from 12 page document about a child's head injury doesn't prove that your father injured Zachery's head. The ONLY person who know for sure that was in custody of Zachery is your mother, Holly, once in the Amusement park and another time when she was having him bang his own injured head on the floor in her presence.
February 10th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
I had to look back and forth between these websites to follow this story. What a mess. It looks like a Jerry Springer Show. Let me know when it aires. I'm going to sell tickets and have a "Bowl Party".
February 11th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Jennifer and/or Jeff, it's pretty clear that you're reading this. I will repeat the obvious: I am not Beth Imm. I am a man of Polish ancestry who has written for years on this forum and others on topics including Slavic culture and how I met my Ukrainian wife. I write about several controversial subjects including feminism and the real estate market. Check out my posting history on soc.men tinyurl.com/dje7m9 I use the same email address going back to 2006. I have physically met with other posters on the forum. I have debated feminists who have highly disagreed with me. NOBODY has ever accused me of being female, much less Beth Imm.
Now about attacking your half-sister. I thought it was Jennifer writing the attack but whoever it was, Bianca is an innocent third party and doesn't deserve you using her in such a fashion. In addition, you use the foul language and hateful tone towards anyone who dares to cross you. It's hilarious, then, when you wonder why your paternal side of the family doesn't want to pick up your phone calls. Duh.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Doh! I meant Jennifer and/or CHRISTOPHER!
February 11th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
PK, you sure struck a cord. It appears that "Christopher" still does not believe that you are not Beth. If Jennifer/Holly, oops I mean Christopher checked they would be able to prove or disprove whether what you said is true or not; that you have been PK from before they reappeared.
So, because they are now angry at you, another picture of Bianca is posted. Like you said, an innocent third party. Knowing right from wrong is part of maturity. Something that is not being shown at the moment on their blog.
Let me say this outright in case they haven't figured it out by now. It is very clear that the blog is an attempt for Holly to speak anonymously and against the gag order that the blog states is in effect.
Jennifer, Zachary and Christopher. Please create another blog in about 10 years and let us know what is going on with you. I am curious to know if the future holds the same torment that your mother brought upon herself, or if you finally looked at the evidence, sought counseling, and stopped being your mother's victim.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Cheeseburger in Paradise
I wonder, Kay, if all is well in paradise. In Jennifer's anti-Mark Collin's blog, she lauds her mother as a single mother raising the kids on her own. In the other anti-Jeff Imm blog, she says that the Danish boyfriend/father is ready to adopt Christopher. I got a bit of a chuckle at how a welfare father in Amsterdam is going to be able to afford the legal paperwork, much less qualify, as an adoptive father but then again, it's amazing that Holly has been able to get foster kids. Do they just give those away to anyone there?
Since Holly's been outed by her Dutch neighbor, she's been hankering to get back into the states. Is she geting ready to run again? How long before "dutch papa", as they call him, wises up?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
If I were the Imm's, I would say , "go ahead and be adopted!" Also, I hope they get a good attorney and run up the bill to Holly as she is now responsible for all their lawyer's bills. Jennifer is an adult and should be a party to a lawsuit for defamation as well as Holly being charged with denial of parental rights and kidnapping. Maybe the Imm's should forward the evidence to the same senators who are helping the Maryland man whose boy was kidnapped to Brazil. Even after PK has announced he is not Beth Imm, Jennifer refuses to apologize. She wants everyone to apologize to her, I do not see any reason to.
I hope we see Jennifer's blog in 2,5, 10 years... Iam a 25yr old victim, I am a 28 yr old victim and so on...
February 11th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Kay
Your thought about running up the bill is not a good one. The attorneys will be paid by the client and then it will be up to him to collect from Holly. It becomes moot anyway because there will be no way to collect since Holly remains out of reach of judgments since she isn't in the US.
The actual facts of this case have been well presented, thanks to Glenn's research. The best thing that could happen now is that Holly and her brood become completely ignored. While discussion of the case has been interesting and revealing, at this point everyone is just fueling the "Collins Clan Rant". I do realize that the primary purpose of this "Rant" is to get the sympathizers checks coming in, but why should any of us be helping in her campaign??
You also must realize that these children have not matured emotionally past the age they were when they were first abducted. I have a feeling that these "adult" kids are fully aware of their mom's behavior but choose to live by contributions rather than grow up and make something of their lives. When you consider the fact that they are collecting untold amounts of money from the public they're scamming and are out of the reach of the IRS or any other scrutiny, it isn't surprising that they aren't willing to shut up and go away. The victim mentality forced on these kids by mom has become their way of life.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
According to the blog, Papa and Holly are not together any longer. Wouldn't Papa be responsible for child support if he adopted Christopher? I don't care if he is the world's greatest man or not, I don
't think adoption works the way they are claiming. He and Holly are not even together much less married. Many countries do not allow unmarried people to adopt. Why would they let some guy she used to live with adopt a child whose father is still alive? I'm sure that Jeff would have to agree to it. Holly, why don't you scan the paperwork for adoption into your blog as proof? All of it, not just edited versions.
Let's say he adopted Christopher. If he disagreed with Holly about something would his fate be the same as Mark and Jeff? Do you see the same thing happening again? I wonder if he knows about the blogs that are out there?
Looks like the Dutch neighborhood doesn't believe her either or are just tired of the game and they too probably owe her an appology for one thing or another. I'm sure they will be bashed in a blog soon, once she can't go after the Imms or the Collins any longer.
Maybe Bianca now has a suit against them.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
We only have to look at the Collins' blogs to see what this blog has caused. Yes, they have responded to this blog, however, if it weren't this blog they were responding to it would be something else. This is their life. If this blog no longer allowed them to play the victim, they would creat another scenario in which they could. Case in point: The charges against Holly for kidnapping Jennifer and Zachary are resolved, so now it is time to move on to Christopher and making him into a victim that they can defend. After all, the donations have to keep coming in.
One could hope that the method of brainwashing done by their mother, (repeat the lie enough and they will believe it), can be used to obtain the opposite goal. That is; say the truth enough and they will believe it. If it only causes them to quietly find the facts and review them for themselves with an open mind, then the "rant" has been worth it.
By the way, it was K.Schroetter that said to spend money on lawyers, not me.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Holly and Jennifer just get more vindictive, more angry and frankly, more unstable with each day. If they weren’t so sick this would almost be hilarious.
Not only are they trashing a young woman who most likely doesn’t know anything about this nightmare…any sane, normal parent wouldn’t want to subject their kids to this kind of chaos…now they’re living in some made up world based completely on some entry on the web. You can only pray it’s not really Christopher they are forcing to read/write this stuff.
Well the name of the website gives you a good idea what this is all about; Billionaires for Bush. I’m a Democrat and I can tell you exactly who this group is. They’re a political satire group who would attend political gatherings around the country back in 2005 drawing attention to the Bush tax-cuts for the wealthy. It wasn’t rocket science to find out ‘DFL’ stands for Democratic Farmer Labor Party in Minnesota.
So Beth must be a witch if she’s politically active.
I suppose we should believe what Holly/Jennifer (they seem to be interchangeable at this point) says about Bianca and her bio dad because well, obviously they would know. It’s just amazing they can’t see just how ridiculous they look. Christopher must be so ashamed.
I also noticed neither of them have apologized to Beth for spreading their lies about her posting all over the internet. Hello, did you not read Polish Knight’s response?? Jennifer seems to think she’s the only one who deserves apologies. It actually looks as though any posting Beth did ended in Aug. and according to their website that was before the gag order came out.
As for Beth Imm posting, I wish she would, it would be interesting to hear from at least one person involved here who is capable of rational thinking.
February 11th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
A friend told me about this case, and I just have to say something here. My own teenagers would die before they posted the things these KIDS are saying. This is by all means Holly posting. Shame on you. You are a truly sick woman.
Holly Collins, I hope you know you will probably rot in hell for this. And that well may be after spending time in prison. It is where you belong if you come back to America.
I feel sorry for the poor families your attacking, and would like to send them money to make you and your children stay away.
Oh and bye the way. Maybe Christopher could show you the use of a condom. Sounds like he learned about it at home. He is only 16. I really doubt you are allowed to adopt or foster kids. You are a known abuser in our country. And I sure hope someone over there is notifying authorities in the country your in.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Deja Vu
I was watching TruTV last night and they did a profile on the Sharee Miller case (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharee_Miller) It reminds me a lot about Holly.
Sharee was having an online long-distance internet extramarital affair and slept with the guy and emailed him nude photos to keep him interested. Then she decided to kill her husband and go for his cash but she wanted someone else to do the deed. Here's where it gets eerily familiar with the Holly Collin's case:
Sharee took a friend's pregnancy test stick and took a digital picture of it. Then she used an old sonogram of her child and said that it was recent and that both were proof that she was pregnant with her lover's child. (Does this seem familiar?) THEN she claimed her husband was a brute and beating her. She took pictures of herself with makeup applied bruises. She set up the poor sap to be a knight in shining armor to kill the dragon and come claim his fair maiden. And he fell for it. While Sharee kept her husband busy on the phone, the lover came in and killed him. After Sharee got her wish, she cruelly told the lover she wasn't interested in him anymore. She later got nailed because the police recovered all of her love emails, photos and videos from her computer. The court testimony of Sharee Miller is eery as she baldfaced lies about writing the emails and seeking to kill her husband.
Holly Collins was divorced from her first husband and ran into the arms of a young Jeff Imm. On Jennifer's blog, Holly writes that she cried out her story to him. Holly immediately got pregnant. I wonder if Holly was maybe hoping that Jeff would become her knight in shining armor to slay the dragon? When he didn't, she took off.
Mark Collins may have literally dodged a bullet.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
There is no doubt in my mind that she wanted Jeff to be her Knight. He must have caught on and I would say that he left, not she. (Remember the "cheating" referrence in her email to Jeff.
She then decided to extract her revenge on two of the many people that have "attacked" or otherwise dissed her, and took three children and disappeared. The beauty of that is she could also hurt her parents, Mark's parents, anyone else that was hurt by the fact that they could not be involved in these children's lives.
I wonder if the pregnancy was to trap Jeff, a typical young man that maybe really didn't want more than a casual relationship with her. Who knows, maybe she was a one night stand?
In any case, I think you are correct PK, Mark most certainly dodged a bullet as did Jeff when it comes right down to it. Probably not a murderous one, but a bullet nonetheless.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Kay, there's something that's been on my mind for a while and I want to ask you as a woman what you think:
What do you think about, as a woman, women who have children to trap men or as a power tool? I remember growing up and women generally didn't want to rush into having children because they really feared the pain of childbirth, or worried about whether they would be good mothers, had a willing and capable husband, and whether they had resources to raise the children right. That's how my wife thinks (hence, one reason I married her.) I personally couldn't imagine having a child on my own even if I was financially capable except, in a sci-fi way, if it was a clone because then it would be truly just my blood running in his veins. The child's other parent is a part of that child as much as their eyes and ears and hair. How can one just raise a child without a connection to that person?
A lot of this also has to do with my slavic studies. I'm of slavic ancestry and took an interest in learning my heritage language and meeting the people and it was eye opening at how much I am like them. It was like visiting my childhood home. I don't feel a need to buy lots of expensive stuff to impress people and fit in because I already fit in and know who I am.
Anyways, I wonder what other women think about this phenominon of women having children on welfare or using kids as pawns or even just having a child by oneself and using the father as a sperm donor. There are few things that get my blood truly boiling and that's one of them. It seems so reptilian and cold-blooded.
Why aren't more women horrified by all of this?
February 13th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Having a child to trap someone, no matter what the reason, is just wrong. I am horrified by that behavior. Both parties to the birth of a child should be in agreement to create the child. When an unexpected pregnancy occurs, both parties should be involved in every way. Denying the right to be involved in a child's life of one parent by the other is cruel. Not only to the other parent, but to the child. When a baby is born and the parents hold and nuture it, a bond is created that is beautiful. If one parent is denied that bond and to continue that relationsip, it is not only a travesty for the denied parent, but it is detrimental to the child. There is a part of that child that he/she will never know, a part of that child's life that can never be recovered. Only a truly selfish person would impose that on another person and their own child.
I have to say that there are circumstances where a woman on welfare having a child is not distasteful or wrong. It would depend on the total circumstances. When a person NEEDS the welfare program to get them through a rough patch, and they are continuing to try to get themselves out of it, the program is being used as it is intended. It is intended to be temporary. If it is used as a lifetime source of income then it is at the very least, distasteful.
As it relates to the subject of this blog: As far as I can tell, she doesn't work and maybe never has. She volunteers and collects welfare. Distasteful. Even more distasteful are the women that give birth to or otherwise "aquire" more children to keep themselves on the welfare role and to give themselves a "raise".
The sperm donor aspect is concerning to me for many reasons. Looking at Jennifer's blog where she is calling Jeff a sperm donor, is where my comments will come from. Jeff did not intend to create a child with Holly. Whether her pregnancy was planned or unplanned by her is not something I know. It is very apparent that once Jeff found that he was the father, he stepped up. That does not make him a sperm donor. He has not been Christopher's parent through no fault of his own, but he still is Christopher's father whether Jennifer, Holly, Christopher or anyone else wants to acknowledge his rights as a father.
Bottom line. It doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman, right is right, wrong is wrong. There is no escaping that fact. Screaming, crying and stomping ones feet does not change that fact.
February 13th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
Amazing how quiet Holly/Jennifer get when confronted with more plausible descriptions of events.
PK, your comparison of Sharee Miller and Holly are about to get even scarier. A private investigator, hired after Holly left, interviewed several men in Massachusetts. Her landlord and some other guy, both mentioned in Glenn’s article, but there was another guy also, who stated Holly had talked about having some guy get rid of Mark. He said at the time he thought she was just blowing off steam. It’s amazing how closely women like this think.
It is telling when you go back and put all this together; she gets pregnant by Mark so she can get away from her parents. Then she gets pregnant by Jeff to get away from Mark (actually she probably wanted to be in a relationship that would look good in front of a judge and what better way than to try and force the poor guy into marrying her). Given her unstable chaotic life, Jeff’s thinking adoption might have been best for Christopher. I would have been. Then she gets pregnant 4 TIMES immediately in the Netherlands, by who knows. What better way to make them let her stay than to have 4 Dutch citizens.
So here we have it, Holly Collins gets pregnant by 3 separate men (or more, no one has said) without being married to any of them, and lives off welfare her entire life. She is by definition a ‘welfare queen’ and gives real women such a bad name.
Think about it, she’s on the run with 3 children who she’s kidnapped and immediately gets pregnant 4 times. Even though the guy doesn’t live with them. . Actually, if she truly does have safe haven in the Netherlands as she says, why did she contact Jeff Imm now.
This all ties in so nicely with Holly/Jennifer’s latest ranting about this poor girl Bianca. For Holly/Jennifer to blame Christopher for trying to put this young lady in such a bad light is just shameful.
And how can Holly condemn Imm’s for not teaching their daughter to use a condom when it’s quite apparent Holly the one who needs teaching. Plus, I don’t know about other parents but not explicitly showing your daughter how to put on a condom doesn’t equate to not teaching her about sex…I know my daughter would give me the great big EWWW!
February 13th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
PK. I ollowed the links and was lead to some reporter interviewing Holly Collins and her neighbors. Can you translate? I would like to see what this woman is like in the Netherlands.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
PK -
Women are horrified and disgusted by this behavior. However, you aren't going to necessarily see them on father's rights blogs. What is more factual today than the historic "trapping a man into marriage" is young women with their eyes on the welfare system: Section 8 housing, free medical care, food stamps, plus all the other freebie programs out there. Many of these young girls don't even know for sure who the father is and don't really care since they've already planned to head to the welfare office before even getting pregnant and they see the child only as a means to an end.
Since the average child support order in this country is under $350 a month, young gals who think they can live on easy street by getting child support have absolutely no clue about what it takes to raise a child. These girls are more often than not uneducated, have no ability to actually earn a living and often dump the kids on grandparents or other relatives. I do realize that this trend is becoming more popular for educated women with good incomes, too, but I don't imagine that their emotional maturity rises much beyond their years playing with Barbie dolls. Then too, while they don't turn to welfare, their kids are palmed off on "nannies" , day care, au pair, or whoever else is willing to raise them. In effect, these kids all grow up without ANY real parent, mother or father and any morals they may acquire are no doubt minimal and fleeting.
Single parenthood is NOT easy even with only one child. High stakes game player Holly Collins appears to brag about her ability to be a single parent to her assorted brood. However, it becomes painfully obvious that the only "parenting" she has done is teach her children to carry on her scam. Of course she can continue to have babies, or "collect" them as she goes along because she has built in day care - the older ones take care of the new ones. It is obscenely unfair that these children have absolutely no knowledge of what a healthy family environment is or what it's like to have their extended family - aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins - involved in their lives.
These women making false allegations, whether vague or bizarre, are one of the main reasons the courts are so clogged that legitimate cases that need to be heard get postponed for months on end. By the time most allegations are deemed unfounded, untold months, untold expense and untold damage all occur.
I don't think I'm "horrified" since I see so much of it. Rather, I am just thoroughly disgusted that these false allegations don't bring criminal action except in rare cases, and that once it is obvious that there is nothing but smoke and mirrors and "positioning" that there isn't an automatic award of sole custody to the target parent. With the utterance of the first lie a child is on the way to permanent psychological damage that may never be able to be reversed. Look at Christopher Imm: He's been told so many times since he was born that he was "abused" that now he's describing abuse he "witnessed" before he was even born. Down the road these children of Holly will be a new generation clogging the courts in a new cycle of lies, false memories and the idea that single parenthood is the best thing since sliced bread.
As I often say, I am of a generation where marriage came before children and the idea of single parenthood was fraught with fear and uncertainty and, more often than not, a humiliating experience for all. My daughters where taught morals and values and I know without question that those values are being instilled in my granddaughters. My 4 year old granddaughter said I need to go buy a grandpa because there are supposed to be daddies and grandpas at home and when she comes to see me her mommy doesn't have a daddy...........and "That's sooooo sad, Grandma". It's a trickle down effect that the Collins children will never be able to pass on to their own children, if they ever trust any other adult enough to have some. What's frightening is that this seems to be a large part of this newest generation.
It is cold-blooded, but one must remember that generally these women ARE cold, have no real ability to love, have severe inferiority complexes so need to prop themselves up as victims and are almost always purely narcissistic . I realize that it's a digression from the topic, but look at "Octumom".......she can't support herself or her kids, lives in a sty, yet has had the funds for 5 invitro procedures (at least), plastic surgery procedures, poses her expensive solar nail French manicure and doesn't "need a man" to enact her childhood dream of having liktters of children. Obviously she couldn't afford a psychiatrist.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
The Plot Thickens...
Mary, I went to sex ed in H.S. AND had a "talk" from my father (both of which were very memoriable and useful) and neither actually bothered to show me how to put on a condom. Bianca's casual reference to "I think I watched a porno or something" is hardly proof that Bianca used pornos as a sexual education tool (then again, Holly's logic is that a 1/2 page from a medical report is proof that someone abused her son). While Beth Imm may be religious, she doesn't appear to either be a prude or a right wing conservative considering that she was a member of Billionaires For Bush (a left wing parody of right wing viewpoints.)
I have had a guess for sometime for why she's freaking out over Jeff Imm (and showing clearly that Christopher is a proxy for her own viewpoint, since the writer is using Holly's rationalizations and gripes rather than what Christopher himself might hold). She maybe felt trapped in her relationship with "Dutch Papa" and was ready to move again. When she manipulated her daughter Jennifer into a media smear campaign to get the kidnapping charges dropped against her, she thought she was home free. Then she remembered that, gosh, running off with the other guy's kids might be a loose end too. Now she's trapped between a rock and a hard place. Dutch Papa may even now start having second thoughts.
February 13th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Mary, try babelfish.yahoo.com or translate.reference.com/translate It may be a little work but I find them useful to get at least the gist of things.
February 14th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I got a bit of a chuckle over reading what is supposedly Christopher's blog today. Now supposedly the Dutch "papa", the guy whose moved out and doesn't want any interest in the "American craziness" has come out in defense of Holly and uses terminology consistent throughout the blog (referring to the father as a "donor.") The writing style of the blog is consistent with a single person writing it.
Holly probably is in a panic now. Here's some more fuel for the fire: Supposedly, Christopher wrote about his outrage about reading about the case in school and being embarrassed. That kind of outrage is usually the kind of stylistic stuff that women go for. On the other hand, it's easily possible that Christopher really COULD be reading this blog and our responses either presently, or at a future time. Then Holly will have some explaining to do.
February 14th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Hey PK, did you know that you're Jeff Imm's wife Beth?
http://whoismyrealdad.blogspot.com/2009/02/beth-imm-is-obsessed-wih-holly-collins.html
February 14th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Yeah Sonja, I know. I posted a response (number 99) here explaining my long posting history going back years indicating that this is not a new, contrived alias. Holly and/or Jennifer continues to stand by their claim.
That's ironically what forced her to flee in the first place: When the courts nailed her on her fabrications, she didn't know how to gracefully back down and then got her hand caught in the cookie jar.
February 15th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Is it just me or is "Christopher" starting to write in a less childlike manner? Look at the older postings that sounded like a 7 year old writing, then compare them to the posting from today. The posting today says that he is writing it, yet the writing is clearly different than the original ones. So, who is writing which style? Or is it the same writer, but the writer has failed to stay in character?
PK, I think you are right on with your observations. Christopher's site still seems to think that you are Betth, but I wonder if they continue in that vein so they have some way to trash Beth Imm.
I wonder why "Christopher" is so obsessed with Beth. That is the reason I believe that it is Holly writing in Christoper's name. My opinion is that Holly feels that Beth stole her man, and therefore denied her the life that would have made her happy and she felt so deserving of. It probably upsets her to no end to know that Beth and Jeff are still married, apparently doing well in their marriage. She probably can't accept that Jeff tired of her and possibly her situation (she was, according to her blog, involved in a custody battle for her children and crying on Jeff's shoulder. This doesn't sound like a relationship that is based on anything most men would find interesting). She is blaming Beth for all the imagined wrongs against her and for our comments and observattions.
Holly, Beth is not influencing my writings, you are. I wonder why you won't post here? Is it because your comments would be rude and foul like "Christopher's" writings, and would therefore be deleted? Why don't you identify this site on your blog? Is it because you don't want your followers to know where they can find the truth?
February 15th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Kay, I think Holly is writing under her son's name for legal reasons (there's a gag order in effect) as well as her previous style of having her dirty work done by proxy. She wants to remain the martyr and move the chess pieces around.
Both of Holly's ex-boyfriends have remained married to their 2nd wives to the present unlike Holly whose now on the road again. Holly reminds me of those moose calls they sell in hunting magazines which brag that hunters could blow on the call and see a male moose running around the tree stand below thinking he's gonna get some. Holly is able to trap a man long enough to get a kid out of them, but eventually they wise up and move on. Holly has lashed out at all of her exes and towards Rena (Mark Collin's wife) so it's possible that the special hate she has in her heart for Beth simply that Beth is standing in her way of moving forward to getting away from her ex-boyfriend "Dutch Papa". Imagine what's going to happen if Dutch Papa starts dating. It's hard to say because this guy was around her for quite some time so I wonder if he's also on welfare (unlike Jeff Imm and Mark Collins who are gainfully employed.)
Holly/"Christopher" often refers to glennsacks.com but not necessarily to this thread.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
PK-google Dutch Papa by his real name. Someone with his name worked, there was an article about open offices which also named the company he worked for. Google will translate the article for you.
So, apparently he worked. Maybe he provided for all 10 kids and Holly and tired of the burden.
.
I have no idea if it is actually "Dutch Papa" or someone with his name.
If you don't know his name, read Jennifer's blog for Christopher. All the clues are there. She gave him up to anyone. This is not "secret" information, this is information that is provided in their website.
Google Jennifer and Zachary with Dutch Papa's last name. Jennifer is in facebook, Zachary is in a band and has an album. This is all public information. The pictures sure look like the two depicted in Christopher's site.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Kay, I found the first name of "dutch papa" on their web site, but don't know the last. I found the company site you're referring to but the two guys with that first name clearly look different than "dutch papa". I don't know of anyone claiming that he's a Muslim (Hello Holly!) and the man on the Christopher website clearly looks Dutch.
Clearly, what we're writing here really is getting under Holly or "Christopher's" skin. Holly calls Jeff Imm a "deadbeat dad" but doesn't deny that Holly is a welfare mother. In addition, she/"Christopher" claim to be spending a lot of time "vacationing" in Paris. Sounds like Holly has a new boyfriend!
February 16th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
PK. Before I give the name here, I want to make sure that I am correct. I'm not absolutely sure that I have the correct name.
Yes, it appears that this site has been a thorn for them. I have gone to Jennifer's other site, and she has redone it,. I don't know how long ago. Haven't gotten through all of the material there, but it looks like she was busy for quite some time cutitng and pasting the same old information in a different order.
I guess she thinks that we are supporters of child abusers, wife abusers and the like. She also states that we are friends of Mark, and Glen's followers. I want to make it very clear: I don't support child abusers, wife abusers, any other abusers. That is not the purpose of my replies. Male or female, one should never touch another person in anger.
I have never met Mark. Don't care one way or another about meeting him.
I am not a follower of Glen. This is the first article I have ever read of his.
Jennifer seems to think that we are mindless pawns of Glen's.
She can't be further from the truth. Glen published the facts as he saw them. Jennifer did the same.
My opinion is just that, my opinion. She is not going to change it by producing the same arguments and evidence. I do believe "the children". I believe that they had these memories. I also happen to believe the memories were implanted.
There are many documented cases of abusers that were not stopped in time. There are just as many documented cases of false accusers. Finally, there are documented cases of implanting memories, and false claims of implanting memories. Call it by any name that you want to. In order to sort out the truth, we look at the evidence. When someone touts half truths and produces half documents as evidence, it makes us wonder what is being hidden. Those are the people that lack credibility. Jennifer claims that she has the entire "file". Then she is missing information. Apparently Holly only showed her what she wanted her to see, as she did with everyone else. Unless Jennifer gets a signed authorization for release of any and all medical records related to Zachary, she cannot know for certain what happened and what the diagnosis were. If she wants people to believe that the memories were not implanted, she has to do better than what she has.
She even goes further and says that some are "threatening" her with deprogramming. As if someone is going to forcibly deprogram her. And I don't know where she saw anything that said that Holly should be gang raped as punishment.
Paris. I commented a few replies ago about that. How can they afford to go to Paris? Also, Christopher says that he has 2 bikes and they cost 2,000.00-3,000.00 each. He wants Jeff to buy him another. How telling is that. And where did they get the money to buy 2,000.00 bicycles?
They also claim that Jeff is a deadbeat dad. How rediculous is that?! They disappear for more than a decade and Jeff has no idea where they are. Somehow that makes him a deadbeat? Huh?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Kay, I've dealt with people with false-memories both from being indoctrinated and those who developed them over years because it's a game they play. One example is that I told such a person that their behavior towards me was like sticking a lit cigarette in my eye. Later on, the person told me that I had said they stuck a cigarette in my eye and that I made up stuff. I recalled that exact conversation and knew they were BSing. Ask that person now and they will swear that I said something totally different than I know I said. When I call them on their prevarications and exaggerations, they change the subject or direct attacks against me. Any admission on my part that I made an error or don't recall something years later exactly in order to refute a claim by them, and they pounce.
I beat them at their own game by writing down any correspondance I had with them and even sending it to them and when they lost some of my letters and tried to use their version of it against me, I had the document right there to back me up. This is probably why Holly lost her court case: She couldn't keep track in her mind what stuff she was making up and nobody could call her on, and what stuff had smoking guns.
Holly's world, as Glenn points out, is that she's a victim of nearly everyone in her life: Her mother and step-father, her first husband, her ex-boyfriend, her neighbors both in the states and Denmark. That's a lot of stories for her to keep straight and to believe that she's a victim and this blog is one of the few times that anyone has ever saw through her game. So she may not have an emotional response prepared for how to deal with that. Her first instinct is probably to run away and set up camp somewhere else where she can make up her own version and not get challenged.
If Holly really cared about her children, she'd come clean and admit what stuff she made up and even if that blew up the cultish world that she's built for them, it would at least allow them to move on and be free of the terror that Holly lives under. Even Holly claims to be tired of all the drama in her life but she can't let it go. The truth sets you free.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Thanks PK. I'll try the translators. I want to know what the people who live by her think. They have the proof from living next door about how happy the kids are, who's on welfare, and if they are normal at all.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I wonder if Christopher is not really in Paris, but Jennifer is a speaker at some function, so she won't be able to write.
I ran across the following:
Make a Donation to the CA3 Piggy Bank!
Become a supporter of CA3. (We are still busy setting up a bank account. Please start saving up for our rainy days!)
Newborn Level - $10
Toddler Level - $20
Elementary Level - $50
Rebellious Teen Level - $100
Courageous Kid Level - $ 500
Defiant Adult Level - $1000
Adult Child Board of Directors:
Founder/Non-Executive Director: Jennifer Tveter
Government Relations Director/Lobbyist: Zachary Tveter
Vocal Director:
Professional Advisory Board Members:
President: Dr. Joyanna Silberg
Secretary: Connie Valentine
Treasurer: Dara Carin
Parental Support Board
Press Secretary: Holly Tveter
Parental Relations Director Tiffini Flynn Forslund
Supporting Organizations:
Courageous Kids Network PIPCA (Prevent International Parental Child Abduction)
http://www.pipca.org/
DAWN, Domestic Abuse Women’s Net (Willapa Chapter)
Notice that Holly Tveter is on the board. That is Holly Collins.
The company is called CA3 (Children against court ordered child abuse)
This is Jennifer's venture. Her web page is:
http://theloveforherdaughter.blogspot.com/2009/01/children-against-court-appointed-child.html
Apparently there is an opening for vocal director whatever that is.
I thought it interesting about the donations. Clearly there is income beyond welfare. Jennifer does go to speaking engagements as one of the speakers. They likely pay her airfare, hotel, misc expenses and a fee for speaking.
II have no problem with her speaking and creating a career for herself. What I take issue with is that she does not present the whole truth. I am certain by the info I have seen that she bashes Mark. What I'm not sure of is now that she/Holly has an issue with Jeff, does she also bash him at these speaking engagements?
Mary-let us all know what the translation says. I saw the video of the neighbor ranting outside the window, but did not translate it. I was very curious to know what he said.
Does he look a little like Dutch Papa to anyone else?
February 17th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Do as I say, not as I do
Kay, I got a kick out of this one entry on the ca3 website: "On February 21, 1992, Rhode Island Family Court's Chief Judge Jeremiah Jeremiah gave this two-year-old to the sole custody and possession of her father despite his history of domestic violence and failure to pay child support. The father, a police officer, brought false charges against his ex-wife, first saying she was a drug addict. (Nineteen random tests proved she was not.) Then he had her arrested for bank fraud, then for sexual abuse, then for kidnapping. None of his charges stuck."
Yet, Holly also made numerous allegations against Mark and Rena Collins of substance abuse and none of HER charges stuck. In addition, she's been on welfare nearly her entire life yet a man not paying "child support" should be grounds to deny him custody?
It continues: "Despite all these false accusations against the mother, she never accused the father of sexually abusing their child, for there was no such evidence. Good parents do not subject their children to the ordeal of an investigation unless the children themselves show signs they are being sexually abused."
Indeed! Holly and Jennifer continue to use portions of old medical records to attack Mark Collins and his wife years after the children have grown. Jennifer bragged that her son was banging his injured head on the floor and children were running away to "defend" her. She then rewarded such behavior by picking up the children after they had run away.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
PK, there are certainly some similarities as you point out. Again, Mark and Jeff dodged a bullet.
I have some observations;
Dutch Papa and the neighbor that turned them in to the FBI, look very similar. Granted, the video that I have seen is either fuzzy or distant, but he still looks similar. I might go so far as to say that I believe that they are one and the same.
There is a web page out there that Jennifer started to trash that neighbor. She said that he became angry when some of Holly's kids left their bikes in front of his place. The video shows an irate person that has to be taken outside by the police. Jennifer claims that the complaint he filed was acknowledged, but Holly and Jennifer's complaint was not. (yet another conspiracy against them I'm sure). It wasn't until weeks later that the police accepted their complaint. So at some point she starts this web page to trash him. She posts the videos she takes on UTube who at some point removes them because they are inappropriate. Does any of this sound familiar? When she gets upset with someone, she goes public on the internet to try to ruin their reputation.
Holly and her brood have moved. Her new neighbors are surely not aware of the history of the family that moved into their neighborhood. How long do you think it will be before someone "attacks" or "abuses" them.
Hey! Maybe they moved to Paris!? ;)
It seems to me that when the neighbor that I believe may be Dutch Papa, got angry, it just could not have been due to some children's bikes being left in front of his place. If you view the video, there has to be more to it. I wish I had the translation of that video. I would like to hear his full version.
He has a web page that he seems to be trashing Holly etal, but when google translates the blog it makes no sense. The just of it though is that he has supporters, as does Holly.
Here is the link to the video I viewed. Let me know what you think about whether that is Dutch Papa or not.
http://www.vkmag.com/videos/videos_buurman_jaap_hogewoning/
Google him, Buurman Jaap Hogewoning.
February 20th, 2009 at 7:33 pm
I looked at the video. I can't tell who it is. But you can see Holly's children and here Christopher. Why would a mother and adult sister engage these children in this behavior.
Jennifer is a student in Psychology?. Is she skipping the classes on emotional abuse. This needs to be shown to the people she is speaking to about child abuse. Who in their right mind would involve little kids in violent behavior with neighbors like this. If this stuff isn't proof Holly is nuts and Jennifer has the same disease, I don't know what it would take.
February 21st, 2009 at 9:43 am
My friend just showed me this site and I just had to put in our view.
First of all Holly is women worst nightmare and enemy. Women like her are the reason so many men are scared to enter into real relationships. Lying, conniving, mean and hateful. And she will raise her children to be just like her. Hating men and living as victims.
It said Holly was married once (2 children). Then does a one night stand and tries to trap another one (one more). Then has FOUR more out of wedlock.
NEWS FLASH....HOLLY. GOD SAID IT TAKES TWO PARENTS TO RAISE HIS CHILDREN.
HOW DARE YOU THINK YOU ARE SO GREAT YOU CAN TAKE IT ON BY YOURSELF.
And who ever the PAPA is, you have no right to help this insane woman adopt 3 more children unless you are always going to be there. And she says herself you are no longer there for these kids. How can you sleep at night knowing your own 4 children, and now 3 more children are in the care of a lunatic. This woman would stop at nothing for pity. She sounds like the type who will make the news. Hello did you read Glenn Sacks, she encouraged her own son to BANG HIS HEAD on the floor. I would like to send you the link about the woman who drove her car in the lake and jumped out, leaving 2 little girls straped in. Or the mother of 5 who drowned all of them. Have you seen the Caylee story?
As a parent of now grown healthy children, I want you to know the JOBS NOT DONE. As parents and grandparents we are still here and needed to help our children and grandchildren. This is how GODs family works. And no child should ever go without all the family that loves them. Shame on both of you
Holly is sick and on a power trip thinking she should have the right to keep these children's fathers and families away. Women like her are why we have men who have problems in relationships.
February 22nd, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Does anyone know if this so-called ‘Papa’ came with Holly to the USA? If he believed her he would. I’m guessing not, because that’s something a true man who loves his woman would do. Why is it he only shows up in pictures…oh that’s right, he wrote a weird letter where he doesn’t even refer to Holly as his mate or woman. And I mean that in the loosest term?
What Christopher appears to be going through is nothing short of extreme emotional abuse at the hands of his mother and sister? It’s also very clear now why Jennifer’s emotional development has become so distorted. The suspicion that Christopher is not the true author of that hateful website is now confirmed.
It’s amazing that now so-called ‘Papa’ can discredit anyone who comments on this story. Now Holly is using her children to fight her battles, since her life of lying was revealed. She actually has her own son defending her living off everyone’s system. So now there will be another 7 children growing up thinking that getting pregnant by 3 or 4 different men, having babies out of wedlock, living off welfare and state assistance their entire lives and then, calling others deadbeats, is the way good, moral, honest people live.
What kind of mother not only allows, but obviously is encouraging her 23 year old daughter to fight her battles. If this girl had any emotional stability she would be pursuing her own life being a student, a working young woman, dating, anything but being forced to relive her life as a 9 year old over and over. I’m pretty sure 99% of therapists would insist this is not just unhealthy, but causing more emotional damage with each and every day. Hey this sounds like the therapists who said she was encouraging the head banging.
Watching this same scenario play out, now with her 16 year old boy, is just disgusting. No sane mother would tolerate her children being so involved in her emotional chaos. The bottom line is, Holly Collins thrives on tragedy and must continue to create it in her life and theirs. Holly Collins is sick.
February 23rd, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Kay, if you can post the URL of the web site, I'd appreciate it. I may be able to run it through translation software and I'll post the URL if it works ok. The video is more trouble to translate since I have lots of friends that speak fluent German but none that I know of that speak Dutch. (But I never asked them so who knows?)
Mary, I appreciate what you said about women such as Holly making men afraid of having relationships but, by the same token, young men should be trained in how to responsibly protect themselves. Simply telling them to use a condom doesn't cut it since such women will convince them they're on the pill or offer sex when he doesn't have one available. It's rather funny that we evolved from a culture where young women were told to protect themselves from predator men to one where young men need to protect themselves from predator women. Ironically, I would push a young son to be more traditional and take things slow. Girls can always get an abortion or even adoption but with young men, such a mistake could cost them and their future family a lifetime of grief.
February 23rd, 2009 at 6:59 pm
There are quite a few. I was looking more and found this very long interview with Hollys neighbors and with Holly . It goes nearly 10 minutes. Not sure if there is a slant on it one way or another, or if the reporter tried to find both sides. Joop in not interviewed.
http://www.geenstijl.tv/2008/04/rutger_en_de_burenruzie_in_rij.html
I would like to see that above interview translated.
Like I said, if you google his name, you will find many hits.
February 25th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
I think that we need to keep in mind that either gender can make false allegations and alientate a child. In this case it is a woman doing this. I am not inclined to say that either gender is free from guilt. I am not willing to go on a woman or man bashing campain, nor am I willing to start name calling. I can't stoop to the level that Jennifer/Christopher has. It only cheapens our opinions.
Holly is not insane. She has some psychological issues, but she is not insane by definition. She also is a woman, not loosely termed, she is a woman by definition. You may not like or approve of the person she is or the things that she has done, but you can't deny that she is a grown female.
PK, agreed. Men and women of all ages need to take things slower. Bed hopping brings unwanted results in multiple forms, not just unwanted pregnancies.
Holly has never accused Jeff Imms of abuse. Only of cheating on her. It comes down to knowing right from wrong. Reacting as a jilted lover instead of a responsible mother is wrong. And now that she and the children are found, she is trying to poison Jeff and Christopher's relationship. She is again reporting false things. She is saying that Jeff wanted to take Christopher away. She cites his emails as evidence. In fact, the emails say the opposite. She is, in front of our eyes, alienating Christopher from his father.
The term PAS is not a true psychological term and this is what Jennifer and Holly are hanging their hats on when they say it doesn't exist. There are studies on the issue and there needs to be more studies in order for all to fully understand it. The studies have shown that false memories can easily be implanted. They just don't call it PAS. So maybe we need to call it what it is: Lying to children, planting false memories.
February 28th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Kay
From a subjective point of view your comments are right on point but the destruction Holly Collins has left in her wake is much more objective to those who’ve lost their children because of one parent’s immoral actions. Like those who were involved with Holly, they don’t have that luxury.
The pain she has caused Mark and Rena must be unimaginable and something that will never be over. Even now, Mark’s daughter is twisting the knife for the sole reason of justifying her mother’s sinful behavior. Aside from Glenn’s blog, no one has looked at this story from both sides. I’m sure people who hear her story would never believe a woman could be so evil, and, by definition, that is exactly what she is. Because Mark does not want to make his family go through this nightmare all over again, his name is again being bashed. And now they can only watch as she does this to another family. I think these people here are entitled to vent their anger. All they have is their faith that GOD truly does have a plan and hopefully a punishment.
You’re right that both men and women make false accusations. It’s been studied and over 90% of parents who make false accusations after a custody battle starts, or after the marriage has failed, are in fact women. We need to call these women out.
To say Holly just has some psychological issues and is not insane doesn’t do justice to her victims. A couple of words that mean insane are irrational, paranoid and psychopathic. So yes I think Holly is insane and sick. Does she know what she’s doing? Yes, does she feel remorse, no. This is a sociopath.
Of course bed hopping isn’t smart. But the evidence Glenn has shown strongly suggests this is not at all the case here. It’s not hard to see that Holly used getting pregnant for immoral reasons and she did it over and over. Probably so she won’t get deported. In one email she says she can’t afford to pay for Christopher’s bike parts and then brags he has 2 $2000 bikes. Her neighbors are angry because she lives off welfare there, just like she did here.
Now her children believe they are just owed something from everyone and don’t have any personal responsibility. Jennifer is begging for donations on her websites and Christopher is demanding money from Jeff Imm. I wouldn’t be surprised if she actually goes after Mark and Rena Collins for child support next.
March 1st, 2009 at 8:54 am
Wilkopedia:
Insanity defense
In United States criminal law, insanity may serve as an affirmative defense to criminal acts and thus does not need to negate an element of the prosecution's case such as general or specific intent.[4] The states differ somewhat in their definition of insanity but most follow the guidelines of the Model Penal Code. All jurisdictions require a sanity evaluation to address the question first of whether or not the defendant has a mental illness. Most courts accept a major mental illness such as psychosis but will not accept the diagnosis of a personality disorder for the purposes of an insanity defense. The second question is whether the mental illness interfered with the defendant's ability to distinguish right from wrong. That is, did the defendant know that the alleged behavior was against the law at the time the offense was committed. Additionally, some jurisdictions add the question of whether or not the defendant was in control of their behavior at the time of the offense. For example, if the defendant was compelled by some aspect of their mental illness to commit the illegal act, the defendant could be evaluated as not in control of their behavior at the time of the offense. ........
Holly was and never has been diagnosed as legally insane. If she had such a diagnosis, she would have been sent to an institution and treated. Instead, the courts gave her some community service, etc.
Holly most certainly knew what she was doing and that it was wrong.
Perhaps some aspect of her mental illness compelled her to kidnap her children, but I believe that she was in full control.
I am in no way condoning or defending her behavior. I just do not want to sound like Jennifer when she pretends to be Christopher. That has been the subject of many of these blogs.
Mark and Rena have suffered due to Holly. Jeff has suffered due to Holly. Holly's children have suffered due to Holly. There is no other way to say it. What she did and continues to do is wrong. She is doing it intentionally and with malice. She is selfish, immature, vengeful, manipulative and has some sort of personality disorder. She is not, however, insane. I won't give her that as an excuse for her behavior.
March 4th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Jennifer is at it again. Now she is advertising for an attorney to sue Glen Sacks for defamation. She includes some false statements about the bloggers here. I for one am not impressed.
Jennifer, you have said the most rude and aweful things about other people. You have created a page for "Christopher" to openly call Jeff and Beth Imms horrible names, make public some very incredible and unbelievable tales about your Grandparents, stretch the truth about anything you chose to so long as it suits you, and you have the nerve to advertise for someone to help YOU sue for defamation. Amazing.
March 5th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Hello Mary and Kay. I was away for a while on different things and popped back in to see what was going on. It never ends, does it? It's becoming clear that Holly and her daughter Jennifer are going to make a career out of slandering Mark Collins and Jeff Imm AND their spouses for life. I haven't had a chance to get the video translated but I can call my friends in Poland see if any of them have been to Denmark. The likelihood of this is low, however. (They tend to hang out in Germany.)
I doubt that Holly is going to be able to get retroactive child-support from Mark and Rena Collins since Mark had custody and Holly was a fugitive from justice. In addition, while Jennifer likes to brag that "all charges were dropped" against her mother, that's not the case. She made a plea bargain and had to make community service. Hmmm, it's interesting to see how she serves even that when she's now a fugitive in the Jeff Imm side of the case and can't come to the states to serve it.
This trust that the judge ordered Jeff Imm to set up for Christopher even as he had full custody is a perfect example of legal bias. How many women have had their children kidnapped and ordered to do such a thing? The trust is now a big cherry pie that Holly is using to bribe Christopher's affections with. Then again, 70 grand isn't what it used to be really. I think Holly as a backdoor trustee would burn through it in a year. It's a tragedy but in looking at the whole situation, one of the smaller ones.
I agree with Kay that Holly isn't eligable for the insanity defense, but I think it's also clear that she has clear mental problems. Part of this is because she was able to use an insane court and legal system even as she has complained about the only instance where it was applied fairly (and she lost custody of BOTH of her sets of children from Mark Collins and Jeff Imm due to her own outrageous behavior.) Holly is clearly angry that she can't get away with ANYTHING. That the system, even as it bends backwards to accomodate her, had it's limits. Ironically, if she had maybe made up one or two claims of abuse that were difficult to discredit, and stuck with them, she might have gotten her way 20 years ago. Instead, she took it too far and got caught with her hand in the cookie jar.
Mark Collin's trying to move forward has created an invitation to Holly to attack him without fear of retaliation. She's fishing around for someone (for free most likely) to sue Glenn for slander yet here she and Jennifer are slandering everyone else with decades old allegations with scant evidence to back them up. I have an X-ray from when my shoulder was dislocated. That doesn't prove that Holly pushed me down the stairs. Ironically, Mark Collins might be pushed into a corner where he needs to defend his reputation and sue her for slander and then it will be interesting when she has to sell Christopher's bikes to pay the legal bills.
March 6th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
I finally got around to reading Jennifer's latest re-vamping of her page. She has again scanned documents in (some are partial documents as usual) and states these documents are evidence of domestic abuse by Mark. The documents are handwritten for the most part and are difficult to read.
8/30/88 "Hit back of head last PM. Stayed over at North. Left this a.m. and has been vomiting, verry dizzy, headache, slightly blurred vision. Did CT last P.M. - No (unreadable but logic tells me it says obvious) trauma to head. Instructed to take NO NSAID. NSAID is not recommended after any head injury because it causes blood to be thinner.
O; (means objective upon exam) PERRLA EO ~ N. (These stand for some neurological testing that is done such as "follow my finger with your eyes") Neuro WNL (within normal limits).
Main complaint headache and nausea.
Recommend sleep, tylenol and fluids. FU PRN (Follow up if needed)
DX (diagnosis) Contusion to head
NOWHERE in that document does it say she was hit by someone. If she had told the MD that someone hit her, it would be in the record. The first part that says Hit back of head last night, is called the history. This is a documentation of what the patient told the MD about why they are there and what happened, what hurts.
She stayed over night at North Hospital. If this incident were evidence of abuse, why didn't she include the North Hospital intake records. This would show what Holly said caused the need for her to be seen by a medical professional.
12/21/90-Hit by Car. Note, the history is what she said happened. I don't know by reading that record who hit her or whether it was an accident, nothing. Again, this document proves nothing about abuse.
Jennifer's next headline referrs to the following document proving her case, including sexual abuse.
12/28/92-Letter talking about a 3cm long scar consistent with a knife injury to that area. There are areas of the letter that are blacked out. Where is the scar? This proves abuse how? I know that I have cut my hand slicing vegetables. ....Sexual abuse? Any abuse?
Jennifer's headline states that the following certainly demonstrate a pattern indicating domestic violence.
1/21/87 Sprained wrist. It doesn't say how.
2/1/87 Jenifer says the next proves she had a dislocated shoulder.
S: (subjective, meaning what Holly told the MD) Husband practicing wrestling moves on patient last night. Injured left shoulder and elbow. "felt shoulder pop out" Unable to move for 1/2 hour. Popped back into place.
O: (objective, meaning what he found on examination) Negative for limited range of motion without severe pain. No palpable tenderness. Elbow non tender, normal motion. Normal function distally.
Impression: left shoulder - negative. Possible left shoulder dislocation (they have to say it is possible because she said it happened) Recheck about one week, start ROM then (start range of motion then, usually means rest it until then, then move it)
If they thought that her husband practicing wrestling moves on her was anything more than playing, it would have been noted. The authorities would have been called. Holly could have asked for the authorities to be called.
3/2/87. Patient fractured foot 2 months ago. (doesn't say how). Yesterday, patient fell down 4 stairs and has pain again. Doesn't want another xray.
Exam: tender at the base of the right foot little toe. Eccymosis (swelling and bruising) NL ROM ankle nontender. ( NL means normal, ROM is range of motion) She had normal movement of her nontender ankle.
Impression: Right foot strain (catchall if they can't find anything but the patient says it hurts). FX 5th metatarsal. (fractured her baby toe). Advised to wear a hard soled shoe and recheck in 1 week if not improved.
Again, nothing says she was pushed or abused. She fell down the stairs and broke her baby toe. That's all it says.
5/27/87-This is only part of the report. The last thing that an MD or radiologist comments on in their reports is their impression or diagnosis. Remember SOAP notes. Subjective (What the patient said happened), objective (What the MD finds during his/her examination) assessment (diagnosis) and plan.
"was xrayed - painful, no swelling. Xray negative."
"impression (same as assessment): left wrist tendonitis. RX (prescribed) wrist splint. Recheck (unreadable how long until recheck or if at all). "
Notice that there is no S or O?
7/16/87-injury to son is Jennifer's headline. Again, only part of the xray record.
8/27/87-Hit head on freezer. (Unreadable) Yesterday 7P.M.
Nauseous, headache
Minor head trauma
Now headache and nausea.
No LOC (loss of consiousness), no vision change.
O: (Objective) PERR..... These are neuro tests again. NL means normal.
12/30/82-the entire right side of the document is conveniently cut off.
Contusion to nose. No sign of bone _________ (assume it says fracture). Told to ice it, take aspirin. Return if no better.
1/1/83 (New years day) 17 year old female with 4 day diagnosis as above. (the"above" the MD refers to is not there)Slight corneal abrasion. Advised to patch the eye, rest it. Follow up (cut off page).
1/4/83-Now has periorbital ecchymosis (cut off) Hemorrhage. In other words, a black eye (cut off). No sign of corneal abrasion, eye test done (cut off)
7 days after she scratches her eyeball, she develops a black eye. How did she scratch her eyeball? It doesn't say. You would think that if Mark punched her or somehow gave her a black eye, she would have said so. Hmmm.
7/17/87. Jennifer says that Zachary has a depressed skull fracture. This is not true. The Radiologist report states "Linear NON-DEPRESSED skull fracture. The MD report says that it is depressed, but he did not see the xray, he read the report. If you look at the bottom of the report by the MD it says not proofread before sending.
The radiologist is trained in reading xrays. So he did NOT have a depressed skull fracture.
In any case, none of the above proves abuse. NONE of it. We all have had incidents happen. How many of us has fallen down a few stairs on our own? How many have cut our fingers or hands with a knife while chopping vegetables? Sprained ankles, broken baby toes. Mark was supposidly beating her constantly and the doctors did not notice this as many times as she said she was in the clinic or hospital? She never told anyone there? I realize that battered women do take some time to come forward about their abuse, but it would have been noticed, she would have been questioned, and it would have been noted. Even if she denied abuse at the time, their observations would have been noted.
She goes further. She goes on a full fledged attack on her Grandmother and Grandfather and is including a minor child now in her rants. She has no shame!! How long before this minor child's name is publicized along with his/her address, phone and picture. How sad for a mother to have one's child and grandchild show how vicious she is in such a public way. It was bad enough that she included Bianca and Brooke in her web page, now she is going to the same lengths to hurt one of her minor relatives.
She is looking for an attorney to sue Glenn Sacks, her parents, and I suppose anyone else she gets a hankering to. If she had such an open and shut case, don't you think that she would have been able to call the attorney of her chosing and would already have filed the suit? Instead, she is advertising on a webpage? Seems to me she couldn't find anyone to represent her. The thing she forgets is that her case became public when they were found in the Netherlands. SHE decided to write everyone she could think of to help her mother escape justice. SHE wrote. The letters are all over the internet. Her version of events is all over the internet. Her version of events is spoken by her at gatherings hosted by women's advocate groups. SHE went public with the information. You need to only look as far as her web page to read what she calls private medical information.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
[...] a case sadly reminiscent of the infamous Holly Collins case, Australian woman Melinda Thompson (aka Melinda Stratton), wife of NSW's Deputy Fire Chief [...]
March 11th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
[...] to documentation, in some others the documentation is not public but I have it in my possession. The Controversial Holly Collins Custody Case--My Findings __________________ Gunner Retired - National Parents' Rights Association [...]
March 11th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
The Canobie Lake Park is in New Hamshire, as we learned from the documents that Glenn cited and scanned here. Easily discoverable is that it is located in Rockingham County. One only has to call the courthouse and follow their procedure in order to get a copy of the full court file regarding the lawsuit Holly initiated against the park.
Jennifer, please read this and believe it. Your mother did not tell you the whole truth. Obtain your own unsensored copies of the entire file(s).
And now, the rest of the story:
Holly decided to sue for 115,000.00, of which 15,000.00 of it was itemized to be for her directly for loss of earnings and for a medical bill for a mental health visit due to anxiety over the accident. She did not work from the time of the incident until at leat 1/87 and claimed to have treated for severe emotional stress and distress from the incident.
The suit was intiiated 8/86 stating that the date of occurance was 5/10/86.
Pre trial statements 1/89, state that the severity of Zachary's injuries was significant. He had headaches, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, blackouts, behavioral issues, post concussive syndrome, psychological problems, hyperacusis.
10/16/90 they settled.
11/2/90 Approved by the judge
The proceeds were to go into a trust. Payments from that trust were to begin when he turned 18. They estimated payments at that time as:
2001 23,000.00
2002 25,000.00
2002 27,000.00
2004 29,000.00
Many physicians were listed as witnesses for both sides. Of particular interest is Dr Backus from the Minneapolis Clinic of Neurology. Remember, this occured in New Hamshire. Why would a Minneapolis MD be listed as a witness?
Contained in the court records is the answer to the above. It appears that Holly's attorney wrote to Dr. Backus for an opinon. The response/opinion is filed in the court records. On 9/9/87 Dr. Backus writes that Zachary's current diagnosis is post concussive syndrome and his prognosis was favorable. No neurological treament is recommended, and the headaches are not permanent. He suggested Zachary see an ear, nose and throat specialist for the hyperacusis. He stated that the current symptoms were as a result of the incident at the park, "rather than the head injury that occurred in July of 1987, when he fell from a shopping cart., even though he apparently suffered a skull fracture with this secondary injury." It seems to me that the defense found out about the shopping cart injury and used that as a defense against the injury filed against them. So now, Holly had to downplay the older injury to get the money from the new injury. I wonder which grocery store she sued and how much she got from them?
So there we have it. The xray report that has caused all of the hubub on this blog and that Jennifer has touted as evidence of Mark's abuse, was suffered as a result of an incident when Zachary fell from a shopping cart in Minnesota (presumably in Holly's care and control). Holly could not provide the rest of the reports because it would have proved her a liar.
I think this goes a long way to the credibility of all of Holly's accusations. Once a lie is discovered, one has to question everything that comes out of her mouth.
I tried to copy the document and place it here, but I couldn't figure it out.
March 12th, 2009 at 12:51 am
Kay: Very interesting indeed.
Is the copy of the report which you have an electronic one (ie PDF) or is it a hardcopy?
March 12th, 2009 at 10:06 am
The court mails hard copy.
I don't know if they can do it any other way. I didn't ask.
I have a scanned copy, but like I said, I couldn't figure out how to attach it here. I'm not that tech-savvy, I guess.
March 12th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
What is occurring with this case is simply a family attempting to run a con and profit from mom's crime. Initially, Holly and her children saw a get rich quick opportunity by assuming that the donations would pour in from all over the world and they could profit as "victims of the cruel world". Now we must assume that this is actually happening to some degree as the family continues to rant about their sad lot in life. The little scam was all set up and they were no doubt getting sympathy cards from the duped public with "a little donation for you children" tucked in. Then as the truth began to make its way to that audience the climate changed from "woe is me" to "how dare anyone rain on our parade".
I don't know if anyone has noticed, but one of the ultimate victim mentality scammers, Denise Brown, has been creeping back into the news, now promoting her little sister's new book about domestic violence. This family continues to rant and profit from ever-increasing tales of horrible years of abuse at the hands of ol' O.J. - undocumented beyond the lurid descriptions of alleged abuse that in reality would have left Nicole Simpson damaged and depressed, not the ultimate party girl resorting to bringing home the bus boy after last call. I think what that family was lamenting was that with Nicole's death the gravy train and lifestyle were cut off so they needed a new means of support.....Ahhhhhh, perhaps we can scam a sympathetic, gullible public and keep the money flowing. It's interesting that one of the last photos before Nicole's death were of her family hanging on O.J., smiling and happy after he paid the tab. But I suppose that was because they were so afraid that they had to put on a good show.
We see stories on a regular basis that show families using their child's death or, as in the Collins case mom's crime, as a new career and a more profitable "job". I am sure most of you can easily put names and faces on a whole list of these gamers. And most of you will no doubt note that the ante goes up when the infamous Gloria Alred sticks her nose into all of those cases around the country that will get her press and allow her to collect off the donations she generates by her hyperbole. Actually, "solicitation" has many other names.............It's rather interesting that after the strident Ms Alred came on CNN ranting that she had "filed a lawsuit" to have "someone" take away Nadya Suleman's octuplets and have them adopted out she got such a backlash that she's suddenly back trying to raise support and money for the woman. Isn't the expression "Go with the flow"? It doesn't hurt that she has her daughter in place on cable news to help promote her sound bytes on nearly every headline case in the country. I call it "make the allegations then move on".
One thing they all have in common is the overwhelming need to have 15 minutes of fame and hopefully as much profit as they can grab before the fickle public starts donating to someone else.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
I see now Holly and Jennifer are looking for attorney's. Good luck girl's. Attorney's don't like to be made fun of in public when their client's are found out to be frauds. Jennifer should go study law. She is going to need it. And I don't think her career as an abused child whiner is going so well.
I just really hope all the women's groups are watching this so they can spot LIARS sooner, and not waste time and money on them.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Judi, I'm not sure how you got to OJ Simpson and the Brown's when everyone here is talking about Holly, Zachary, Jennifer and Christopher. OJ and the Brown's are the topic of another blog another time. But, OJ was guilty in my opinion. Start a blog somewhere about that and I will debate you there. (That's one of my favorite topics to debate.)
Lisa, the only human tragedy as far as I can tell is that two fathers were denied a relationship with their children for no good reason. Even if you believe that Mark was abusive to Holly, there has never been an accusation of physical abuse by Jeff.
March 13th, 2009 at 1:31 am
Petra -
I wasn't changing the subject, but rather addressing the pattern of behavior of "professional victims" and the use of media coverage for profit...........right on target with the Collins' behavior and the fact that they are only one in hundreds of similar or eerily identical to theirs. There is a tendency to isolate a single case and lose track of the games they're playing, Attack and counter-attack and little Minnie May in Mississippi tucks some sympathy money in an envelope and sends it to the poor victims. This case differs little from almost every parental abduction case I've dealt with: Abduct, flee, alienate and indoctrinate the children, get caught, cry abuse, get sympathy, get money, appear on Dr Phil, on and on ad nauseum. Only the names and faces change, but the patterns are the same. I deal with these cases on a daily basis so I suppose I see very little that is unique in the Collins case. The difference is this one has had the publicity and the kids are keeping the drama going in a public forum.
March 13th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
OMG Kay! Talk about investigating, maybe Glenn should hire you!
As if Glenn’s article hasn’t revealed Holly and Jennifer Collins’ story the information you have sealed the case, cut and dry. I’d bet big bucks (honestly!) we’ve heard the last from Jennifer because that’s what happens when someone cannot defend their lies. She can’t respond anymore because really, what’s left to be said. In this case silence is the same as admitting guilt and she can’t wiggle out of it.
Your right Kay, we can add a grocery store to the long list of people Glenn listed she’s tried to sue. This also explains her only posting half the documents on Jennifer’s website.
Holly probably spent her, I mean “Zachary’s”, money and now she needs to sell herself again. $100,000 from 2001 to 2004 doesn’t go very far, especially when you spend $4,000 on a kid’s bike AND go vacationing to Paris, unless of course you live off welfare. No need to translate those videos of her neighbors because they must have gotten sick of watching all this.
Now she’s going after her mother on Jennifer’s website, poor women. Jennifer claims the mother sent all this information to Glenn first and that’s the only reason she started “defaming” her. What’s just amazing is how Jennifer/Holly can post volumes of information on the web, in the news and even stand up in front of an audience to tell their story, but when someone like Glenn does a story…based on documentation they’re suddenly victims.
I think Glenn should invite both Jennifer and Holly onto a TV show and have them defend their claims, since you’ll remember, they can prove it beyond a doubt. I also wonder how the anti-PAS groups like Silberg and Nolan would react now…let’s ask them! I’ll bet they’re running away from her as fast as they can, just like the ex-husband and his wife, the one night stand and his wife (these poor guys and their families) and even her own mother (and probably the rest of the family).
March 14th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
[...] Quick Bit on the Holly Collins Case Just a quick bit to mention that Glenn Sacks has written a brilliant article debunking all the lies told by Holly and Jennifer Collins about Holly's former husband Mark. For years now these two have been vilifying the poor porker in the media, with great (and unsurprising) support from the feminist establishment, and Glenn has been looking into it and it seems the real guilty party in this is Holly herself. And you don't need to take Glenn's word for it either as he provides a huge amount of supporting documentation- court reports, medical records and so on.From the handicapped sister who successfully filed a restraining order against Holly to Holly's habit of accusing anyone who pisses her off of abusing her, this woman comes across as a psychopathic liar, indeed one court found her to have Borderline Personality Disorder. Porky highly recommends this article to anyone who wants an example of how feminists will "neglect" to check the facts when its suits them. Sacks' article is here. [...]
March 17th, 2009 at 9:43 am
Looks like Holly has run out of 'proof' and her career of being a victim is over before it began. You'd think she would know that eventually someone would provide the other side of their story.
I pray this is a case where the daughter finally figures out her mother has been lying to her all these years and is going to get on with a life where she isn't a victim. I do feel sorry for Jennifer, she has a lot of soul searching and most likely (hopefully) intensive therapy ahead of her. Maybe someday she'll be able to understand her memories, regardless how real, came from growing up with a manipulative mother, whose goal all along was to keep these kids from their father. Maybe someday Mark will be able to forgive her for attempting to ruin his life just as Holly had tried and maybe now she can truly help her little brother.
Glenn, I still think you should attempt to expose those organizations who were so willing to throw their support behind Holly just because they thought it would further their agenda. Perhaps this time Jennifer will join you on stage.
March 17th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Hello! I just popped in and, well, Wow! Kay, Wow! Can I hire you as a paralegal?
March 17th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
PK, I am always open to considering new endeavors.
:)
I think that because Jennifer is no longer updating her web pages, one or more things are happening:
1. She is off speaking somewhere and hasn't had the time. (She was speaking in the US at the end of February)
2. She has decided not to respond or react in hopes that interest in this site and her story (from this perspective anyway) will end.
3. She is busy looking to obtain the record I referred to.
Say to say it is probably both #1 and #2 and none of #3.
It is so interesting that since Jennifer has been iff speaking, Christopher no longer writes. Unless he decided to join the French Foreign Legion or something, "he" also has been strangely quiet.
There is a video of her most recent speaking engagement. It is bad. She is not a good speaker. She really needs to take some classes. Not trying to slam her, just stating a fact.
March 18th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Kay, it's possible that Holly mother's cease and desist letter had some effect. Maybe they had to "back off" on the blog because here was a woman willing to fight back to defend her reputation.
It's interesting that Holly/Jennifer felt it was so important to attack the reputations of her father and maternal grandmother and when the grandmother defends herself, she implies the woman is being petty. Isn't it petty to go on a decades long campaign against a person in another country?
In addition, it's also possible the Imm's are also making headway with their case and maybe they're getting busy with that too. Mark Collins and his wife appear to just want to stay quiet and hope to be left alone (which, ironically, is a pattern similar to what LEGITIMATE abuse victims go through) and are only spurring on Holly and Jennifer to attack more.
Don't worry. I think that Holly and Jennifer don't have much else going on in their lives than this so they'll probably have something to say either on the blog or a new public forum.
March 19th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Kay, how interesting you found out Jennifer was here and speaking some where. What is the link to that site? She’s obviously not in ‘Exile’ anymore because she seems to be able to come and go into the US whenever she likes.
Personally, I’m going to write a letter to whatever group she was speaking to, and send them this link, and ask them if they’ve read Glenn’s article as well as the latest document stating Zachary actually got his skull fracture from falling out of a shopping cart. This/these groups should know their credibility is on the line. That she is still ranting and raving on her site we know Kay’s #3 is NOT the reason for her silence.
Now she’s completely stopped her allegations against Mark which tells me #2 is likely right on. This is completely in line with her MO. When anyone successfully shows her story is false, Mark, the courts and now Glenn, she just moves on to the next in line for her allegations, acting as though the facts of her last accusations just don’t matter. Just glancing at her latest attack on her mother and stepfather, it’s nauseating to try and read all of it all, it’s again 99.9% her opinion with selected quotes which could actually mean a number of different things.
There is one other possibility of what’s going on here and that is it’s now Holly writing on Jennifer’s site. The latest post goes into so much detail of events that happened decades ago and again Holly’s version. It seems a little strange that Jennifer would actually know all this. This actually makes #2 more logical. Maybe Jennifer is actually looking into her mom’s story so #3 is really the case. This could also be why the other site is suddenly silent. Who knows Holly’s actions look like a carnival house of mirrors?
PK,
I think you’re probably right about Mark and Imm hoping she’ll just go away, most men just don’t want to deal with all this chaos. Unfortunately for them Holly has lots of experience manipulating the law and they are just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Its really sad for them that she/they have posted the details of Mark and Imm’s personal contact information, they may now have all their nutso supporter hounding them day and night. I’d just want that to go away too.
March 20th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Mary, I didn't see Mark's personal contact info. I'll look around for it. Perhaps one of us should send Mark what has been discovered here so he can defend his reputation?
I think maybe he believes that even if this doesn't go away, that as far as he's legally concerned it's probably over. That's probably true but it appears that Holly and Jennifer are setting up a "flash mob" and could even go after his or his wife's employers or worse. As I said, this is a classic example of abuser escalation except Holly is in the abuser role.
What Jennifer is doing, or allowing to be done in her name, is illegal in a number of ways. There are federal laws against internet stalking and harassment and next time she visits to bash her father in public, the police could and should pick her up and question her. Mark and/or Jeff could also file a federal defamation lawsuit. Sadly, the latter requires a will to put up a fight but Jennifer (and Holly behind her pulling the strings) are bullies who won't leave him alone until he shows he won't take this lying down.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
II was out of town and came back and find that Jennifer has renewed interest in this site as evidenced by her usual attack on someone on her page. Of course, more unproven allegations.....what an amazing thought process she/they have. She is angry at something that we write, so she writes vile and ugly things about whomever she feels like trashing that day.
I too think that this behavior is more indicitive of someone with Holly's known behavior, however and unfortuneately, it appears that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree in this case so it may be impossible to distinguish one from the other.
It is interesting that she doesn't respond to the report that I cited in my post, but instead lashes out at her (mother and stepfather) grandmother/grandfather. The best defense is a good offense?
I think she is of the opinion that I am Elenor Gallager. Rest assured Holly/Jennifer, I am not.
The second reason she didn't respond, in my opinion, is that she cannot defend it., but she also can't try to put her spin on it and make it out to be something it is not because she probably has not seen the report. It does take a while to come in the mail.
Mary, the video of Jennifer's speaking engagement is at:
http://vodpod.com/watch/1397785-jennifer-tveter-collins-americans-in-exhile
Natl NOW Conf. in Indianapolis on June 19-21. I'll bet Jennifer is intending to attend and probably have her own booth. We know there will be a donation jar in a prominent location on her table.
I too wonder if the people that have hired her or intend to hire her, have actually read the evidence. Even if they read this site and hers, I just don't know how they could support her so strongly. They obviously have not read the evidence that are public.
Of course, when you look on her site at those that follow it, there are about 8 people. How many people did she say follow Glen? 50,000?
March 20th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
I'm thinking it would be really cool if the Imm's or Gallager were to file a cease and desist letter with NOW with the evidence discovered here. NOW is, whether they admit or not, a business just like Holly and Jennifer. They make their money off of women's misery (real and alleged) that they can get away with. Do they really need a fugitive from justice whose easily discredited representing them?
We can't do this. Only Mark Collins, Jeff Imm, and Mrs. Gallager can make that call. Can anyone here forward this on to them? Is Mark Collins aware that his ex-wife and daughter is still slandering him by claiming that he smashed his son's skull when the source of the injury was the wife herself letting him fall out of a shopping cart? Even if she focuses on poor Mark Collins at the NOW convention, whose to say that she won't bash everyone else (including us) while she's there?
March 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
PK, I have a feeling that Holly/Jennifer will push all of these people beyond the point that they can ignore her/their illegal actions.
July 1st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Sorry to come back to this after all this time, but about the asylum thing - I read somewhere online that Holly allegedly slathered all of them in tanning lotion and then dyed everyone's hair black. She used this to claim they were Bosnian.
Now, since I just read this without a reputable source, I have no idea if it's true, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.
August 3rd, 2009 at 9:30 pm
The instability, lies, manipulation, abuse and parental alienation by Holly Collins is so well documented. To deny any of it is to support child abuse.
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:54 pm
Once a mother alienates her child (as encouraged, coached and rewarded by the courts) it backfires on that mother too, and ruins her own life too. Imagine the relationship between the two with all the problems so apparent with her daughter on her daughter's blogspot? Jennifer's blogspot is a VERY good example of PAS in action - contradictions, lies, hysteria, etc... She's a mega-drama queen whose life is now ruined and sucks in everyone close to her.
I've experienced much of this my my own daughter who was so severely brainwashed that she could "vividly remember" events that never happened and contradicted herself. Her brothers finally called her on it and proved to her that the main event never happened and could not have (they were there for the staged "non-event" which their sister was not there for, and they set her straight). You should have seen the shock on her face. It never came up again. That killed some of the drama and abuse from my daughter, but not all. The effects of PAS linger. Too bad it took so many years for that to come about - my kids finally congregating toward me in recovery of all the abuse orchestrated by their mother and her parents.
Yes, moms DO commit much more PAS. Certain congenial "experts" ignore some of the proof and reasons as to why - not wanting to offend feminists or their attorney friends too badly, or maybe sucking them into admitting that PAS does happen? Logic can go a long way, in addition to observations, toward confirming moms are the culprits of PAS child abuse much more often than dads:
1st- moms are given a free pass. Moms are additionally encouraged, coached and rewarded to alienate their kids. Dads aren't. 2nd- Moms make most false abuse allegations, not dads. 85% of RO's and PO's use false allegations. That's a LOT of false abuse allegations! And what do those automatically result in? False abuse allegations virtually guarantee a follow up of the kids getting alienated from dad, by mom, of course.
No big surprises or revelations here?
August 4th, 2009 at 8:04 am
[...] The Controversial Holly Collins Custody Case–What Really Happened? [...]
August 4th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Glenn,
Great job as usual I think it’s safe to say the FFLM comments on your story don’t actually negate any of your points, they’re just spewing , which is what they do when confronted with inconvenient facts. It must be some kind of sickness that these people WILL NOT accept any information then that which feeds their agenda.
The first thing I thought when I read your article and I immediately remembered the Collins case, especially the enormous amount of comments, which I’ve added this one to also. When I went back to Jennifer’s website all I could think of was “you’ve got to be kidding”. Between that article and some very savvy/privy posters, all that’s left for Holly/Jennifer/FFLM is to call names. Now she says the date issue in Glenn’s story is wrong, but in fact that’s precisely her point. How can it be a typo as she claims?
“FIRST OF ALL – GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!
1986 - The amusement park accident was in 1996. The medical records clearly state "NO BROKEN BONES!"
And
1987 - My father beat up my brother and my mother in July 1997. That is when he broke the bone in my brother’s skull! Because of this abuse Child Protection became involved and told my mother that if she didn’t take us and leave our father she could be charged with “failure to protect.”
And
My mother and father didn’t have to sue the amusement park because they offered a settlement to the accident victims. There was a court appointed trustee who had to approve the settlement because it was an injury to a minor child caused by negligence on public property. You can be sure that if a child’s skull was fractured because of a defected amusement park ride, the settlement would have been extremely higher…”
It was interesting then and still is now that Jennifer couldn’t/doesn’t refute one poster who had a copy of one of her doctor’s letters regarding the skull issue that it was caused by the kid falling out of a shopping cart and once again her supporters print this nonsense.
As far as the lawsuit, which it was, Holly Collins v Canobie Lake Park, type of case PI (personal Injury) and demanding $115,000 sounds like a lawsuit to me.
To Burke
They seem to me be hate mongers much like the Collins now, which I hope never has children nor is allowed to mess with the minds of others.
Unfortunately, Holly Collins has already tainted the minds of her other 7 kids and they will (or maybe already are) passing their dysfunction along.
August 5th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
If Canobie Lake settled, I wouldn't be surprised if it was because they typically did. I used to live by there and it was considered notoriously unsafe for several years. I think there were even multiple lawsuits.
August 6th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Isn't it amazing how the DV establishment picks lying, crying, abusive drama queens over and over, to parade publicly to illustrate the validity of their cause. Their real concern and legitimacy really shows.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:40 am
I am glad to see that people are still reading Glenn's investigation and the comments following it.
I see also that Jennifer is back as well, and is now trying to again defend her mother.
I had hoped that the hiatus she took was to review the court records as I had suggested some months ago. I see that she has not. It's still such a sad thing to see. I pity her. She will never know the truth because she refuses to look at the facts.
Jennifer, are we back to the skull fracture again? Did you not get the complete court record as I suggested? The skull fracture that you are talking about occured when Zachary fell out of a grocery cart. That's the truth. The record does not lie.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:47 am
Holly’s fabricated story just keeps going. With Jennifer’s obsessive mental health problems she just can’t get on with her life. I noticed she responded to Glen’s recent mention of within the hour of his publishing that article.
I assumed Jennifer might have realized her mother only given her one side of the story since it’s been proven the whole fractured skull incident really happened when he fell out of a shopping cart.
Given the statements from the FFLM, it’s so typical Jennifer can’t disprove this;
“Then Jennifer spoke up, and the audience and moderators gasped when she told of her brother’s skull being broken by their custodial dad (who would violently beat their mother Holly).”
Obviously Jennifer left this tidbit out while trying to rally the extremist who still support her. Those days may be numbered.
She rants over and over that she’s the one who knows because it happened to her but just like PAS, her entire world is built around a lie.
I think Jennifer was hoping she’d have a fresh audience but no one is even listening anymore, except those of us who know the truth which Glen has proven beyond doubt. I’d bet money Jennifer will go back into hiding which is a clue to her lies.
August 13th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
She won't go into hiding long. She waits until she thinks all have forgotten, then resurrects the story. Her goal is to be an activist, and the only story that she has is the one that her mother fed her all of her life, so she has to continue the lie as long as she can. It suits her need.
It's amazing that those people that hire her to speak don't bother to check. If they actually read this blog they should be suspicious and ask her (Jennifer, Holly AND Zachary) to release the information so they can verify it. That would be the ethical thing to do. But it does not support their cause and Jennifer has such a sad, albeit untrue, tale to tell, so they continue the farse. Putting their heads in the sand is easier than exposing one of their favorites to that kind of scrutiny.
August 14th, 2009 at 7:43 am
Jennifer and Holly’s days of being activists are already done. If she/they can’t get around the truth of the skull fracture here they won’t be able to anyway else, just like the Inside Edition fiasco.
Note to Glen; maybe you should clarify they cancelled the segment without running it, most likely because they did some checking. Having their picture in the story makes it look like someone actually believes them.
Hopefully there are enough people, like us, still holding them accountable. All the media has to do is read Jennifer’s blog, which will lead them straight to Glen’s site, because she’s tried defending herself (unsuccessfully). It’s so blatant that every time she’s confronted with the skull lie she goes silent. Isn’t it telling that the FFLM isn’t commenting here either, not even once, they went after Glen with their teeth bared on this story.
Kay, did you read the bizarre song all her ‘kids’ supposedly wrote? Thanks Glen, your recent story made me go back and look at Jennifer’s blog. The way it’s written, idolizing Holly, I bet money Holly wrote it herself. If not those kids are also suffering from PAS. Notice it says Holly’s so wonderful…blah…blah…blah…AND she’s raised them all on her own. Sounds like father 2 (3?) is already out of the picture. Having to raise you kids on your own because you’re too unstable to maintain an adult relationship isn’t something to brag about. There is one line that speaks the truth about this women; CRAZY.
August 14th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Danno,
This case is a very good documentation of just how serious PAS is and what it does - steals their minds, turns their lives upside down and destroys them - living in the hell of an seriously altered reality... Yet NOW, FFLM all DV Coalitions defend and promote alienation of children like this. This is yet another of so many clear testaments against all of this rotten bunch of the ultimate organized criminals. You can't miss it if you keep reading both sides, and that's how this bunch always does it - disappear for a while when revealed, then resurface as if nothing had taken them down, using all the same identical illogical lies and arguments...
August 16th, 2009 at 10:43 am
So Jennifer, since you decided to answer Scott, and once again plead your case, you must know all your credibility rests on your brother’s skull fracture. This is the evidence you yourself provide over and over. Yet when confronted with contrary information from a doctor in writing regarding a legal matter specifically involving your brother’s head injury, you suddenly assume the silent victim.
Since you have dedicated most of your adult life defending your mother and publicly demanding “justice” from everyone who will listen, going so far as on national television and saying the most horrid things about a man, your father, who the court itself found to be a more fit parent than your mother, why can’t you refute this documented fact?
You claim we are “hounding” you yet what you and your mother have done to your father is beyond criminal. Because you refuse to provide anything to disprove the documented fact your brother fell from a shopping cart, when will we see a public apology (preferably on TV) for all the pain (abuse) you have yourself inflicted on your father and his family? In the end, whose hounding who?
August 18th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Tom,
What always confounds me is that so many female victims of PAS will continue living in this hell after they’re old enough to know the facts. This is where the “victims” become the abuser…of the innocent parent which is most often the man. In this case, Glen not only took this altered reality apart but most of the original 175 comments from sealed the grave. Absolutely an example of resurfacing as if nothing happened.
Someone definitely hit a nerve with Jennifer and we know who; those of us who think MOTHERS are also abusers. One thing me, Kay and you did get wrong, that they would lay low for a while.
She keeps saying how Glen lied but if you read Glen’s investigation he only put valid questions out there. In fact his conclusion was this.
“Since Collins resurfaced in 2008 I have not seen any newspaper, radio or TV reporter or commentator take a close look at the record in the Holly Collins case. I have done so, and there are many problems with Holly Collins' version of the events in her case. Below I list and discuss some of them, and provide links to documentation.”
As the Glen we know, has links to everything.
Now here we are again with the rants and raves of the FFLM/Jennifer. But she still will not address the “skull fracture” smoking gun and her supporters either don’t know the truth or they’re conveniently disregarding this tidbit so they can have one of their best poster-victims. Interestingly, she/they went silent about this blog immediately after it was debunked the first time by Kay who obviously had access to court docs. As you said they've resurfaced as if nothing happened.
They still keep parading the skull fracture, heck Jennifer just said it again “it happened a year before [the amusement lawsuit] when my parents were still together”. But you can’t get around the letter from Dr. Backus wrote to your mom’s attorney. If I recall Jennifer had the actual medical reports in her blog.
By Kay quoting the court doc here from her source March 11th;
“He stated that the current symptoms were as a result of the incident at the park, "rather than the head injury that occurred in July of 1987, when he fell from a shopping cart., even though he apparently suffered a skull fracture with this secondary injury." It seems to me that the defense found out about the shopping cart injury and used that as a defense against the injury filed against them.”
Now Jennifer/FFLM have decided to start the charade again, but here’s Kay’s doc. Ain’t the internet great.
“Dear Mr. Hage, [defense attorney]
Enclosed are copies of my correspondence concerning Zachary Collins, and a copy of the initial history obtained by my office nurse Karen Grandstrand.
In response to the questions in your letter of August 10, 1997 [during the amusement park lawsuit], Zachary’s diagnosis currently is post-conclusive syndrome…[skipping to the paragraph]…It would be my opinion that the present complaints relate to the accident that occurred in Salem, New Hampshire at [amusement park], rather than the head injury that occurred in JULY, 1987,WHEN HE FELL FROM A SHOPPING CART, even though he apparently suffered a skull fracture with this secondary injury”.
Jennifer also just gave it away;
“1987 - My father beat up my brother and my mother in July 1987. That is when he broke the bone in my brother’s skull! Because of this abuse Child Protection became involved and told my mother that if she didn’t take us and leave our father she could be charged with “failure to protect.”
Obviously if Child Protection warned your mother they were going to take you away, Dr. Backus would have known at the time. He was the attending doctor, duh.
This is a clear case of these kinds of women who will go to any length to keep a man as the abuser when actually it’s just proof that PAS does exist. Glen gave his kudos when they did get it right now let’s see if they’re honest enough to do the same. Don’t hold you breathe.
August 18th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
Also, if the CPS thing existed, she'd probably have presented it at the custody hearing. Pretty much proof there was no such thing.
August 30th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
I just reviewed Jennifer's latest spewing. She still misses the mark. She says that Glenn's followers are attacking her. Ravings of a wanna-be child abused. She said that her life was horrible, and I would imagine that being a small child on the run was horribly and horrifying. Over and over she rants about all of the evidence that she has, but never speaks of the report regarding Zachary and his fall from the shopping cart. Because she can't. That would expose the lie. She has to muddy the waters by spewing more of the same. Poor Jennifer. Attacked again. She has brought it on herself. If the groups she speaks for would look at the evidence with open minds and let it lead them to whatever conculsion they come to, they probably wouldn't hire her again to speak. But she draws a small croud with her sad tale, false as it is.
Jennifer, I dare you, address the report from Dr Bakus that states that Zachary's skull fracture occurred when he fell from a shopping cart. Better yet, Holly, I dare you to woman up and tell the truth.
August 30th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Danno,
Yes, you would think the victims of PAS child abuse, like Jennifer, would search out the truth and get it once they are adults. Some do figure it out due some very glaring contradictions, etc. that just don't jive at all with their mothers' wild stories. They don't realize their mothers are drama queens who must lie and abuse. They don't want to see that. They still dream of a mother who is wonderful to them, and do all they can to create that "reality" too. Some don't want to reconcile the contradictions and lies to make full sense of what is really what. You Can put the facts right in front of them, fully verifiable, and they will reject those facts in favor of not betraying their abuser/mother whom they are still very attached to and dependant upon emotionally and want to see as the mother they always wished they had but didn't.
PAS is nasty stuff and sometimes unpredictable. My own daughter's case has a lot of similarity to Jennifer's situation in some ways. My now adult daughter remembers me "going crazy and beating up her brother, gruesomely," right in front of her when she was age 8. this is despite the fact that he had no bruises or marks and admitted that he was not hit or hurt in ANY way after his mother made the false allegations to get favor and full custody in divorce. That was the real abuse.
My daughter can still "remember" the fabricated events which were violently pounded into her mind over and over by her mother and grandparents until she became sacred, confused, angry and convinced that the closest person in her life, her protector from abuse, her dad had miraculously turned into a monster. Yet the effects of PAS had her convinced that her protective "dad had gone crazy and would come back and beat up or kill her and her siblings..." if they didn't write letters to DCFS and the judge to assure I was kept away and they were kept safe. This just kept them under the control of the real abuser and her even more abusive parents who did abuse them, which they fled from eventually. Yes, that would be VERY frightening and enraging to any child, to have false memories (proven false) become vivid real memories. Those memories are real to her and just as emotion provoking as a real serious abuse event would be.
My daughter, or Jennifer Collins, aren't really lying when they freak out, cry and remember and recite what they were abusively fed, over and over until they actually "remembered" these fabricated events. It's real to both of them. The liars and abusers are their mothers, and my daughter's grandparents and all the court hangers-on, who help gang-molest children like this.
I thought my own daughter had come to grips with the "memories" of this "event' being false and fed to her when her brother actually and finally convinced her that he had not been beat up by me and that she therefore could not have possibly witnessed any such event. He had initially gone along with his mom with the promise of rewards (which ended up with him just being further abused by by both of her parents as well).
With a bogus protective order on me (out of his life totally), and my son being interviewed on this by CPS, he admitted to CPS that I had not hit or hurt him in any way - I have it in writing. He and two siblings separately fled the real abuse from their mom and grandparents finally and came to live with me resultantly as out of control teens.
When my daughter fled the ongoing verbal, emotional and physical abuse by her mom and grandparents and came to live with me as an out of control teen, she was very confused and angry and explosive often, though it slowly calmed down somewhat. It seemed quite conflicting with those false memories and then the real abuse memories also, somewhat in conflict but both teaming up on her mind. But that didn't cure her of the false memories like Jennifer also has been proven to have just the same. My three kids who fled real ongoing abuse to come live with me as teens did better in my home, a non-abusive, supportive atmosphere. But my two who were alienated worst struggled the most and still do much in the exact style as Jennifer. My son who was supposedly beat up by men has done very well and seems to not be affected at all by the earlier PAS, maybe because of a natural resistance to it, but maybe because he was the one supposedly beat up and knew and thus saw the real situation best.
Now that she is an adult and moved out on her own she once again "remembers" the false abuse fed into her mind by the real child abusers/pack-predators. She needs her mother's approval, a mother who was always manipulative and abusive and withheld approval, except when agreed with and supported and revered most highly. If my daughter were to come upon this blog or Jennifer's I believe she might likely once again spout the very damaging false memories that are so easily disproved, much the same as the Collins case. Then she would go silent like Jennifer once the truth was out in the open and solidly proven, only to later bring it all right back up as if never disproved at all (she's done this before).
Once she fled the real abuse and moved in with me, I could not find any "professional" who would touch her case on the PAS part - politically incorrect... Positive Parenting did do some good, but this one was a hard case. Some kids, though few, just can't be alienated and will get angry at their mothers and call them liars when they try to abuse their child with lies and brainwashing about their fathers (This is further "proof" that the dad is abusive). My daughter of course does remember very well the real abuse she fled, from her mom and grandparents, the perpetrators of PAS too. But, she doesn't realize what the very worst abuse committed by them upon her was: Stolen, hijacked, kidnapped mind with horrid, vivid "memories" implanted that actually do destroy her life while she was programmed to think her protector dad is the one who destroyed her life...
Jennifer Collins is going through a very similar thing. The vivid PAS planted memories seem very real to her but are very easily and solidly proven false. Her memories don't jive with solidly proven reality at all, but some kids, even as adults, just don't want to give up the PAS. PAS is very real, very abusive and destroys their lives for sure. Some kids want to embrace and learn the truth after they become adults, while some don't. Some want and "need" the ever elusive approval of their manipulative, abusive, ill mothers much more than they want reality and truth. PAS is the real and most serious of all child abuse in their cases. They continue to deny how PAS has very negatively impacted their lives and will continue to until they reconcile with reality.
August 31st, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Jennifer has stated that being called on to tell the truth has "damaged her career". That is her reality: a "career" based on parlaying her tale into paying speaking engagements, donations and attempting to have her 15 minutes of fame. She most certainly knows the truth. She has been thoroughly indoctrinated to be a "victim" and has most certainly learned from her mother how to profit from it. She aptly named her "organization" caca so she must have a trace of a sense of humor! However, you can rest assured that she is seeking donations and trying to figure out a way to get more publicity and more money. Her premise of "court appointed child abuse" should be more reasonably called "sore loser revenge", as in "The courts thoroughly investigated my mother's story and found it to be untrue and false, so mom got mad and kidnapped us from our dad since she didn't win".
This girl has always known the truth and I have a strong feeling that she isn't as much a victim of PAS as everyone makes her out to be. She didn't live a life "on the run", (I qualify that by saying that the life on the run usually associated with parental abduction is one in which the mother and the children live a fugitive, gypsy life style, moving from place to place, shelter to shelter, etc, always fearing detection) but rather a settled life with her mother who had already promised to make a media circus out of her case before she fled to Holland. All Jennifer is doing is making her mother's threat of a circus come true.
Little Jennifer needs to get a real job, hopefully get some education and grow up. She is probably growing frustrated and angry at losing momentum in her campaign. Her caca blog now lists supporters like Connie Valentine (the ex mental health worker who claimed that as a child she was forced to kill people in a satanic cult) and Joyanna Silberg who sees a sex offender behind every door and is using Jennifer as her current poster child...truth be damned. At least Jennifer has learned how to do research and gather the "names" who rant her same "theory", so she should be able to go to school and learn a real trade.
No one but a couple of posters here is giving her much attention lately, so perhaps she'll finally move on........unless the funds start pouring in. Keep in mind that Valentine draws money from United Way.........
August 31st, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Tom M. I am so sorry that you have had to go through all of that, but most of all that it is not over. I long have thought that Jennifer might be beyond hope or help. You have confirmed that it is an extremely long road to recovery, but one can only recover if they can accept that their mother has lied to them and work hard towards recovery.
I am not altogether sure that Jennifer does know the truth as Judi C has stated. I think it is a matter of blindly believing her mother and not using her own intelligence to determine whether or not she has been lied to and by whom. She could easily obtain the record from Dr Backus as I suggested, but she refuses. Maybe because she does't want to destroy her career as Judi C thinks, but maybe also that it is easier to hate her father than to face the truth: that her "sweet" mother has lied to her all of these years.
September 5th, 2009 at 6:34 am
Jennifer’s response on her blog to Glenn’s article comparing the Collins case with the McCarty case is just par for the course for the FFLM crowd. You’ll notice she states;
“I do not know if Liam is grateful to be out of the care of his mother, but I would guess that he is very releived that the Italian courts are protecting him from his father's abuse.”
How telling she doesn’t know if Liam is grateful or not, truth be told she doesn’t care. Jennifer conveniently blames the father even though the Italian courts removed Liam FROM HIS MOTHER, specifically because SHE was the abuser…no small coincidence both mothers are diagnosed with Munchausen. All these nut jobs care about is their own agenda, not the kids. Case closed.
Kay, it’s pretty obvious Jennifer does in fact know the truth. Her silence about the real cause of the brother’s skull fracture is proof enough for me. I’m pretty sure it was your post way back when of the dr.’s record about the shopping cart, do you know if it’s part of Glenn’s initial investigation and anyway you can post it again? I copied what was previously printed way back, but may not have had it verbatim.
As well as drawing as much attention as possible to the McCarty case, Collin’s case needs to be included because they both just support the truth of PAS.
I found another parallel in Barbara’s comments on Glenn’s article “Numerous Parallels Between McCarty, Collins” that the Italian public is outraged just as Collins neighbors are outraged at her living off the dole while “vacationing”. Kudos to Glenn for recognizing the obvious.
September 5th, 2009 at 9:05 am
The letter by Dr Bakus was not published in Glenns information. Jennifer never used the document that I can tell. It wouldn't serve any purpose for her.
I think until the actual document is scanned into Glenn's investigation (above) Jennifer will pretend it doesn't exist.
Jennifer's timeline she posted recently shows that they vacationed for about a month. Wow. And on public assistance. I guess they don't have a conscience.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Kay
At some point she won’t be able to pretend, she’ll have to come up with some bogus explanation. Its typical these women cry foul and try to change the subject when caught with their pants down. My guess, she’s already worried and will go silent, except to her dwindling FFLM supporters. If her story was true (not), she’d be able to defend it to the end. Fortunately, there are enough of Glenn’s supporters who’ve read Glenn’s complete investigation that she can’t fool. I’ve never seen more comments on this blog. As dads we need to keep the pressure on and use these situations as examples of PAS and the bias of the law against fathers. It’d be great to see someone do a follow-up on this travesty.
Does anyone know who Barbara is that comments on Glenn’s site regularly? It appears she is also an advocate and it would be interesting to get her take on the Collins case, especially if she also does investigations.
As far as their vacation time, no they have no conscience, just their “victim” sense of entitlement.
September 7th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
I noticed in the 1991 medical report from Childrens' Hospital Jennifer said if she had one wish it would be for "a dad." She couldn't say whether it was for her own dad or another person like a dad. She also didn't know how to draw her family, and drew her mom, brother, and herself on one page and her dad on another.
Maybe I can't feel sorry for her now, but I can certainly feel sorry for a six year old who wants her dad even when her mom is trying to keep him away from her.
September 9th, 2009 at 9:05 am
Lurker, pity is the last thing either Jennifer or Holly deserve. Taking advantage of people’s emotions to manipulate has been Holly’s strategy for her entire adult life, just go back and read Holly’s very long history of making false accusations. She may appear, even boasts, she is a sweet, shy, kind blah blah blah mother but her actions defy this entire façade. Jennifer deserving any sympathy or support ended when they went public with their agenda to slander Mark Collins, and anyone else who questioned their validity.
The true victims and the only ones who anyone should feel sympathy for are Mark Collins and his family, Holly’s own family which she viciously defames and many others who’ve been unlucky enough to cross paths with both Holly and Jennifer, including Jennifer’s siblings.
Holly has admitted that the younger kid’s father is no longer in the picture, literally if you look at Jennifer’s blog where she says the kids wrote a (very weird) ode to their mother. He’s nowhere to be found and who could blame him, he ran from as far and as fast as he could, unfortunately not until after Holly went and got herself pregnant 5 times. How much can you bet she's once again blaming the man because she's not capable of any kind of normal relationship. Par for the course for these FFLM.
Apparently Jennifer never even talked with her father in person, let alone on the phone to see him for herself before she joined Holly’s crusade. What kind of grown woman would do that after being forbidden to have contact with him for 16 years? She never inquired into the full court records, only the ones Holly allowed her to see. Unless she is just as unstable as Holly, at 25 she should be able to recognize deceit.
September 9th, 2009 at 10:02 am
To clarify, I wasn't feeling sorry for Jennifer today - I was feeling sorry for her when she was six.
September 9th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
I feel sorry for her now. She is so entrenched in the victim mode that she can't see the truth. Sometimes the ignorant do deserve some pity. Not that anyone can do anything about it or change it. Just pity for the pitifull.
September 16th, 2009 at 7:28 am
On Jennifer’s blog she’s soliciting for donations, of course after she goes through her whole diatribe again. She’s a piece of work to cry foul after she tries to ruin the life of her father when other fathers who’ve been through this kind of nightmare stand up against the radical men-are-always-abusers crowd.
Just for kicks it’d be interesting to see who donates to her charity, it’s most likely tax exempt. If my taxes are supporting these I have a right to know who the donors are according to the IRS.
Then they should receive a full copy of Glenn’s investigation along with the information so many here found out.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
I have been unable to find a 501C-3 corporation for her. I think she is just "collecting", not accounting....if indeed anyone has been foolish enough to send her money. Note that whoever her advisor is he/she must have warned her not to call herself a charity. She and her brother are the "officers" of her "organization" so one must presume that they are just trying to carve out a free ride. By the way: exactly what is a "non-executive director" in an organization of one?? What is a "government relational director"? Who is Zachary "lobbying"? Does he have a clue what a lobbyist is or does? Plus, she only lists a "board" of discredited people and one wonders exactly what this "board" does.
It should be noted that nowhere does Jennifer say she is located, give a valid phone number or use anything but a free hotmail account (one not associated with a subscription to MSN). Does anyone actually know what country she lives in? Does anyone have any idea where her financial support comes from? Does anyone else shudder when there is a possiblity she is giving some kind of legal/professional advice to bloggers?
There is that old adage: "When you're right you're right, but when you're wrong be wrong at the top of your voice." This gal knows full well she's just a "professional victim" trying to structure a paying scam. Fortunately she isn't out there at the top of her voice, just desperately trying to convince a small handful of people that she needs them to pay her rent. What's she hiding from? She wasn't "mistreated by the courts", but rather she was mistreated by her mother. Now she needs to get a GED and a job and not submit her "professional opinion" until she can spell publicly, write like an adult and get at least a minimal education. It's painfully obvious she's never had one.
November 4th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
[...] and their fathers. Some examples of these frauds include the Genia Shockome, Sadia Loeliger, and Holly Collins [...]