When Psychologists Attack
Some psychologists believe they are godlike; they see and know nearly everything and have a supernatural intuition to interpret what they don’t see or know so they can say they understand everything. A psychologist’s “insight” and “wisdom” are too often considered “perfect truths” in court. Dr. Connor can give you any “perfect truth” for the right price.
I must be some kind of moron. When I signed Dr. Connor’s contract, Provisions to Serve as an Impartial Evaluator, I thought an Impartial Evaluator was someone who didn’t take sides. I thought a contract that said the parties were entitled to a copy of the case file from the evaluation, meant that the parties were entitled to a copy of the case file. In my childlike naivety I thought you were allowed to challenge evidence in court. I requested a copy of the case file. Dr. Connor provided a number of conflicting reasons as to why he could and could not release the file. I presented the evidence of Dr. Connor’s false statements to the court. No one cared that Dr. Connor entered into an agreement to provide psychological services to my Ex during the course of the evaluation. I didn’t know that legally questioning why an unlicensed psychologist is providing false written statements was considered a dangerous attack on Dr. Connor.
Lawyers don’t challenge the ethics of psychologists they use or may have to face again. They make their clients pay for another psychologist to play patty cake to see whose “perfect truth” is more perfect. Dr. Connor said I couldn’t communicate and that my writings were confusing and difficult to follow. As you would probably agree, my writings are not confusing and difficult to follow and I can speak in complete sentences. Dr. Connor was used to living in a world were people would accept anything he said. I must have been the first person to notice that Dr. Connor didn’t always tell the truth… or at least the first person to question him about it. Here are the Rules for Survival for a Bad Custody Evaluator.
Rule #1 If you get caught with your pants down, be proactive in contacting the Judge before anyone else gets a chance.
On February 19, 2008, I dropped off a packet of information to Dr. Connor’s office that included a 17 page letter documenting the conflicting information within Dr. Connor’s evaluation. Two days later, Dr. Connor contacted Judge Carl H Taul to tell him there were “numerous errors and oversights” in the evaluation and Dr. Connor would only charge half of his fee to correct his own errors.
Dr. Connor's February 21, 2008 letter to Judge Carl Taul
Rule # 2 You are a psychologist. People believe everything you say. If you said something you wish you could take back, just change your story a little bit next time.
When I began asking Dr. Connor for the case file and questioning how someone could make “numerous errors and oversights” in an evaluation playing a role in determining the lives of children, Dr. Connor began to change his tune.
Dr. Connor’s March 11, 2008 letter to Dan Brewington
Dr. Connor’s April 16, 2008 Addendum. Note how Dr. Connor needed to file an addendum because there were numerous errors and oversights in the evaluation.
Rule #3 If resorting to trickery or intimidation doesn’t scare off someone who caught you cheating, remember you are still are a psychologist. Make yourself the victim by using your credentials to convince people that the person asking too many questions is a danger.
Dr. Connor's Aprils 1, 2008 letter to Judge Carl Taul. I was under the impression that if you are going to challenge an evaluation report, you need the supporting evidence.
Rule #3 ...continued. If the situation becomes dire, attack at all costs.
Dr. Connor’s September 10, 2008 letter to Judge Taul. Dr. Connor has a pattern of manipulating partial quotes to serve his own agenda. My original quote in the letter was:
“Your actions have greatly hindered and delayed the Court proceedings and have created hardship for my children and me. The game is over Dr. Connor and the Court has ordered that the “delivery to counsel representing a party is the same as delivery to the party personally” so your argument has no factual or legal basis.”
I fail to see how my statement is threatening nor do I see how someone could interpret that I am implying that the Court doesn’t take the matter seriously. Judge Taul took the matter very seriously. He knew there would be a lot of trouble for his unlicensed expert if I got a copy of the case file.
Dr. Connor’s September 10, 2008 letter to Judge Taul. Could Dr. Connor try any harder to be the Judge’s pet?
Dr. Connor’s September 10, 2008 letter to Judge Taul. Dr. Connor, a non-party to the legal proceeding, requested protection from the Court so Dr. Connor wouldn’t have to be held accountable for his actions.
Dr. Connor’s closing remarks in his September 10, 2008 letter to Judge Taul. Poor Dr. Connor. Dr. Connor acts as if it were painful for him to attack me in his letter to the Judge.
Unfortunately for Dr. Connor, even Judge Taul had to distance himself from Dr. Connor’s September 10, 2008 letter. The above is Judge Taul’s September 16, 2008 response to Dr. Connor’s letter.
Dr. Connor’s December 22, 2008 letter to the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology. When all else fails, call the person dangerous behind their back. The only problem was Dr. Connor probably didn’t count on me obtaining a copy of his letter through a public letter request. After I received Dr. Connor’s response, I sent him a letter informing him to have his legal counsel contact me directly regarding any restraining orders or harassment charges. I have yet to hear from Dr. Connor’s attorney.
Above: Kentucky Revised Statute (KRS) 319.082. I filed a complaint against Dr. Ed Connor with The Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology in November 2008. The Board has almost all of the information on this website plus some, yet the Board ruled that there were no “apparent violations” of KRS 319.082 that warranted an investigation. Let me rephrase that; the Kentucky Board of Examiners of Psychology ruled that an investigation of Dr. Connor was not warranted because the Board didn’t find any apparent acts of “moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption” relating to Dr. Connor’s psychological practices.
Rule #4 If all else fails... When you take the witness stand in Court, testify to something so ridiculously insane; only a top FBI profiler would have the credentials to professionally dispute your claim.
Above: Judge James D Humphrey wrote this in the Final Decree of my divorce. I would hate to see what would happen to Stephen King if he had to go through a child custody evaluation with Dr. Connor.
Dr. Edward J Connor still hasn’t given me a copy of the case file