Much has been published on the Vaughn – Wyrembek adoption and custody case, and there are many opinions about what has happened and what should happen. This blog is where I’ll write my thoughts on the case. Snippets of information were published in articles, and allegations found in the comments written in those articles. But it’s difficult to keep track of what happened and when. The same questions were asked on many sites with differing answers given. So I’ve been trying to put together a chronological timeline of the major events in the case, to answer for myself the questions I had. One big question is, Grayson is nearly 3 years old, why did it take so long?

The timeline is what I’ve put together from online sources, articles, interviews, and court documents. It’s all public information, but there may be errors in the compilation (e.g. dates, typing, omissions etc.) Anyone can search for and verify/dispute the timeline information using the same sources.

I don’t know any of the parties involved, and I’m not a member of the support groups for either side. I don’t represent or speak for anyone. I put this together to help myself understand the case. I’m posting it to help others who may have similar questions I did, and to have others correct anything I’ve gotten wrong. Comments are open, but this is not a site to bash either party. I’ve posted my own comments in the timeline. I believe the little boy should be returned to his father, that’s my opinion. This blog is open to other opinions, just be rational (and not disingenuous) in your comments.


8 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Gaye Tannenbaum
    Oct 11, 2010 @ 23:10:57

    Thank you so much for this! It really answers a lot of questions, especially why it took 17 months for the DNA test. I knew it had something to do with her ex-husband being the legal father but I didn’t realize that it was the Vaughns who had objected to DNA testing. It’s beginning to make sense and many of the allegations against the father are falling by the wayside, as expected.

    Some of the more egregious allegations (other than the ones you mentioned above):
    – Father has an arrest and/or prison record for drugs and violence.
    – Father is unemployed and living with his parents, and the child would be raised by grandparents.

    I’ve even seen posts that dismiss the father as a good parent because he “violated his marital vows”. I guess reading comprehension is not one of their strong points.


    • thinkingoutloudcafe
      Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:02:23

      You’re welcome. I’m working on another post that will link to the court documents I referenced. It’s slow going, since there’s a lot to link to. But no one has to wait for the next post. Most of the documents can be found on the Ohio Supreme Court’s Online Docket under cases 2009 – 2355 and 2010 – 1375. Some of the Indiana Court documents have been attached to the documents filed with the Ohio Supreme Court cases. Other information on the Indiana cases can be found under Indiana Supreme Court Orders: 2010 Other Orders, Cause No. 22S00-1009-OR-470, and by searching under “Civil, Family & Probate Case Records” at State of Indiana Public Records Inquiry for case no. 22C01-0908-DR-00688. Anyone can verify the timeline for themselves.


    • thinkingoutloudcafe
      Oct 12, 2010 @ 01:44:07

      The Indiana Court in granting the emergency ex parte order said “based upon on the evidence presented at the hearing in this case, it appears that [the father] has a criminal history, including drug offenses.” In an ex parte hearing, only one side participates, and the father was not able to present any evidence to the contrary. The same court later vacated their own order granting temporary custody to the Vaughns, and instead ordered the child returned to Ohio for the transfer of custody to the father. ABC news, in the GMA article, calls it a “history of juvenile arrests.”

      I always prefer to go with what’s in the court rulings (not just the records) over an article. But here the court the court does not specify if it’s a juvenile record or an adult record. Nowhere is “violence” or anything similar, mentioned in the court rulings.

      Regardless of whether or not it’s a juvenile record, neither the Ohio Juvenile Court judge, Guardian ad litem, or the same Indiana Court judge found it to be a reason to deny him custody of his son.


  2. Gaye Tannenbaum
    Oct 12, 2010 @ 09:35:39

    “A criminal history, including drug offenses…” can mean anything from arrest at 16 for smoking marijuana to jail time for running a meth lab or dealing heroin. If it’s the former, he’s got lots of company.


    • thinkingoutloudcafe
      Oct 12, 2010 @ 12:00:26

      I really don’t know. Here’s where I’m relying on my reasoning, and stating my opinion. I think if it was a non-juvenile criminal history of drug offenses, it would have left a paper trail. Particularly if it was a serious infraction involving felony charges and not misdemeanor charges. Serious charges tend to make the local news blotter, or get appealed upon conviction. The father has a unique name, which makes an online search easier, but the only mention I found of anything on the topic is in the Indiana ex parte court documents. A juvenile record would not be made public. One more thing, I’ll emphasize, I don’t know if this is the same person, but the Toledo online records show under a search of ‘Criminal/Traffic’ case information, the only records for someone with that name, are traffic violations resulting in fines of about $35. If it is the same person, would that count as a ‘criminal history’? I don’t know. The easiest way to resolve this speculation is for the people making the claims to the public, to provide the documents/proof to the public.


  3. Gaye Tannenbaum
    Oct 12, 2010 @ 12:11:26

    If juvenile offenses are not public record, who would have access to it? The PAPs’ lawyers? Only the courts?

    I would imagine that the birthmom might know because the father may have mentioned it at some point in their relationship. Of course, not having (public) access to the actual records makes for lots of speculation on the part of the Media Blitz the PAPs had been running.


    • thinkingoutloudcafe
      Oct 14, 2010 @ 11:15:27

      I don’t know who would have access to the records. If it’s a juvenile record then the point is practically moot. Few things done as a child have much impact on whether or not you can raise your own children as an adult. From reading the court documents, his record (whatever it is) didn’t hold much sway with the courts. If they’re interested in ending the speculation, then the people making the allegations should provide the documents to prove their allegations.


  4. thinkingoutloudcafe
    Oct 19, 2010 @ 23:38:06

    While the documents related to this case have still not been posted by those making allegations against the father, a reader has provided information that clarifies the allegations and ends the speculation.

    The ‘drug parah’ charge cited in the Vaughn’s Indiana emergency petition, is a charge that was DISMISSED by the courts over 6 years ago.

    I haven’t read anything where the Vaughns claim the father had any violent conduct. But I have read comments posted by people claiming the father had a history of arrest for assault/violence. To be clear, NO documents have surfaced to support that claim, and NO assault/violence is referenced in any of the court documents available that I’ve read.

    The charge that a court ruled on over 6 years ago was “disorderly conduct”.

    Think about it. It’s the same charge picked up by thousands of college kids every spring break. It’s not quite the impression some articles gave of an undisclosed ‘record’, but maybe it was more interesting to leave it up to people’s imaginations.

    The information cited is available to the public online.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: