Court Watchdog Weigel Ejected for Demanding Transparency
By Richard Luthmann
(KINGSTON, NEW YORK) – Helen Garber, a nurse practitioner and mother, walked into an Ulster County courtroom expecting justice – instead, she walked into an ambush. On July 18, 2024, a sudden “emergency” contempt hearing was convened with breathtaking speed and secrecy.
Garber had only hours earlier filed a domestic violence petition for an Order of Protection, seeking safety from her ex-husband. But within minutes of her filing, opposing attorney Elizabeth Faulkner fired off an email to Justice Julian D. Schreibman (Ulster County Supreme Court) forwarding Garber’s sealed petition and demanding an immediate hearing.
In that email – an ex parte communication Garber knew nothing about – Faulkner sneered that Garber’s petition was “made in bad faith” and full of “nothing more than conclusory allegations.” Faulkner even claimed Garber had “provided [d] proof that she is using a recording device…despite [the court’s] order to the contrary,” painting her as a lawbreaker.
Heather Harp, the court-appointed Attorney for the Child, immediately piled on, joining Faulkner’s request to haul Garber into court on contempt charges.
By 5:23 PM that day, Justice Schreibman was being urged to take the case away from Family Court Judge Sarah Rakov (who had scheduled a July 8 hearing on the matter) and fast-track it under his own gavel.
The result was a July 18 emergency hearing in which Garber – the very woman who sought protection – was suddenly accused of child abuse and contempt of court.
“This hearing resulted in my ex-spouse receiving primary custody and myself being ordered to pay child support, legal fees, and carry the entire mortgage,” Garber later said, describing the blindsiding outcome.
In the span of weeks, a mother seeking safety was transformed into a villain in a closed-door courtroom drama that has shocked observers with its brazenness and breakneck speed.
Ulster Family Court Ambush: False Allegations, Phony Trauma & a Shotgun Seizure
At the heart of this outrage are the false child abuse allegations that Faulkner and Harp leveled against Helen Garber. In the July 18 proceeding, they painted Garber as a dangerous mother who had traumatized her 8-year-old daughter, Evelyn, during a police incident on June 10, 2024. Faulkner claimed Garber had illegally installed surveillance cameras to spy on her husband and that she recklessly left her child exposed during a volatile firearm seizure at the family home.
The reality, backed by hard evidence, is starkly different. Garber had not installed any cameras – her estranged husband had done so (without her consent) months prior. And when sheriff’s deputies came to retrieve the husband’s shotgun as part of the protection order, Evelyn was nowhere near the scene.
“My daughter was at therapy during [the service],” Garber said, noting she even provided proof of the therapy session.
In fact, Garber had proactively removed the firearm from the home weeks earlier for safety.
“I told deputies the shotgun had been safely stored – 3 weeks earlier – with neighbors,” Garber recounted of the June 10 retrieval.
She arranged to meet deputies at a neutral location that evening to hand over the weapon, which she did peacefully, with a neighbor witnessing.
Yet Faulkner and Harp spun a nightmarish narrative of a child “severely traumatized” by armed officers storming the home. Shockingly, an official police report from that day backs up their bogus story – with details that don’t match reality. The report claims Garber surrendered the shotgun at her home around 4:52 PM, before her daughter’s therapy, and omits the neighbor witness.
In other words, it depicts exactly the scenario Faulkner alleged, where a young child would have been present and terrified. Garber obtained this report nearly a year later, only to realize “the police report aligns with Faulkner and Harp’s false narrative” used against her. To lay out the discrepancies plainly, consider the following:
| June 10 Police Report (Official Narrative) | Actual Verified Events (Evidence) |
|---|---|
| Time of gun surrender: ~4:52 PM (late afternoon) | Time of gun surrender: ~8:30 PM (after 8 o’clock) |
| Location: Garber’s home (183 Horton Ln) | Location: Neighbor’s address (168 Prospect St) |
| Child present: Implied yes (before therapy) | Child present: No – child was at therapy during the police visit |
| Witnesses noted: None (neighbor omitted) | Witnesses present: Neighbor Jessica Pabon and her family watched and assisted. |
This blatant mismatch between the official report and the actual events is no trivial error – it bolstered the false claims that Garber endangered her child.
“Taken together – rapid ex parte communications, missing testimony, and police records with critical inaccuracies – these events suggest a coordinated effort to discredit me and distort the record,” Garber wrote in disbelief.
The shotgun seizure, which Garber handled responsibly, was twisted into a sensational pretext to label her an unfit mother. It appears the facts were rewritten on paper to justify an outrageous legal assault on her character.
Garber is left wondering: if officers and attorneys will file false reports and allegations to win a case, what won’t they do?
Ulster Family Court Ambush: Vanishing Testimony and Altered Court Records
Even more disturbing is how the court record itself was altered in Garber’s case, effectively erasing her defense. On June 18, 2024 – a hearing before Judge Schreibman leading up to the contempt ruling – Helen Garber took the stand to rebut the lies.
She brought three supporting witnesses to court (neighbors and others ready to testify on her behalf), but incredibly “[a]ll were present but not permitted to testify,” Garber says.
Garber was the only one allowed to speak, and she did so under oath, telling her side of the story and submitting documents to counter the allegations. By all accounts, her testimony was crucial – including proof that her ex-husband controlled the surveillance system and that Evelyn was in therapy during the purported “traumatic” police visit.
Attorneys Faulkner and Harp grilled Garber for 30 minutes after lunch that day, attempting to erode her credibility. Yet none of this appears in the official transcript. According to Garber, the transcript of the June 18 hearing shows Faulkner stating an intent to call witnesses (including Garber) after lunch, then, after a brief recess notation, it jumps straight to closing arguments, omitting all post-lunch testimony.
It’s as if Garber’s sworn testimony never happened.
“I was questioned by Ms. Faulkner and Ms. Harp for ~30 minutes after lunch… [then] the transcript jumps to closing arguments, omitting all post-lunch testimony,” Garber later wrote, baffled at the disappearance.
Garber noticed the anomaly immediately. The very next day, June 19, she emailed her attorney, expressing alarm that her testimony and exhibits were missing from the record – before she had even received the full transcript. That contemporaneous email proves the omission wasn’t an afterthought or error on her part; something was wrong with the record itself.
When pressed for answers, the court reporter, Ann E. Seils, refused to certify the transcript as complete. The reporter’s certification only attested that the transcript was “true and accurate,” conspicuously omitting the word “complete,” according to Garber.
All requests to correct or acknowledge the gap were stonewalled – even the judge showed no interest in addressing this flagrant irregularity. To this day, no official explanation exists for the missing half-hour of testimony.
Notably, Garber has pointed out that in the missing portion, both Faulkner and Harp had doubled down on their child abuse allegations against her, and she had defended herself on the record. That critical back-and-forth is now scrubbed from the transcript – and from Garber’s ability to appeal or clear her name.
The pattern is unmistakable: exculpatory evidence and testimony vanish, while false narratives are preserved. It’s the ultimate procedural sabotage.
As Garber summarizes, the system ensured a one-sided story: “missing testimony from the official transcript, exclusion of witnesses/evidence… suggest a coordinated effort to discredit me.”
In a court of law, such tampering should be unthinkable. Yet it happened, raising the question of whether court officers themselves conspired to predetermine the outcome.
Ulster Family Court Ambush: Outrage Erupts – and a Pattern of Judicial Misconduct
The Helen Garber case has ignited outrage far beyond the litigants. Court observers are aghast – and at least one was ejected for daring to speak up.
David Weigel, tireless watchdog and founder of the Family Court Fraud Warrior Project, attended a recent Ulster County court session in support of Garber and was horrified by what he saw. He barely lasted five minutes in the courtroom before being thrown out for protesting the judge’s extreme secrecy measures.
“In the first five minutes of this excuse for a court of law, this PIG said that no reporting to the press is allowed, no reporting,” Weigel fumed outside the courthouse, referring to the judge’s gag order on observers.
The judge (described by Weigel as “not a human being… a treasonous pig to this country” in a burst of New York anger) had declared Garber’s hearing closed to the press, flatly stating, “There is no First Amendment in this… courthouse… This is a closed court.”
Weigel stood up in open court and demanded, “How is this legal?… You think this is Russia?” before officers escorted him out.
His outrage mirrors the public’s disgust as details of Garber’s case trickle out. Why, people ask, would an honest court fear press coverage if they had nothing to hide?
Multiple judges have now reviewed this case, and the whiff of misconduct is unmistakable. Judge Sarah Rakov, who initially oversaw Garber’s family offense petition in Family Court, saw the case whisked out from under her when Faulkner and Harp maneuvered it into Judge Schreibman’s court.
Judge Julian D. Schreibman, a Supreme Court Justice, presided over the July 18 ambush hearing and has so far refused to address the missing transcript or the troubling irregularities raised by Garber. Instead of serving justice, these judges are presiding over what appears to be a coordinated railroading.
Key evidence in Garber’s favor was ignored or suppressed: her witnesses were never heard, her proof that the child was safe was not entered, and even an email from the sheriff’s deputy suggests unusual communications involving Faulkner (“If it’s going to be Faulkner, her private number is going to be worse,” a deputy remarked on video as they served the order – hinting that the attorney was pulling strings behind the scenes).
Ulster Family Court Ambush: A Broader Pattern?
Observers now suspect a broader pattern in Ulster County’s justice system – a pattern of backdoor dealings, record-altering, and blatant bias against litigants who dare challenge the status quo.
Is this part of a broader pattern? We asked Attorney Elizabeth Faulkner and the New York State Office of Court Administration for answers. OCA serves as the press representatives for NYS judges. We received no response as of press time. Here is what we asked:
——- Forwarded Message ——-
From: Richard Luthmann <richard.luthmann@protonmail.com>
Date: On Friday, October 10th, 2025 at 10:11 AM
Subject: ULSTER FAMILY COURT AMBUSH — Request for On-Record Comment re: Garber Case (Ex Parte Email, Missing Transcript, Police Report Discrepancies, Press Suppression)
To: elizabeth@dandrealawoffices.com <elizabeth@dandrealawoffices.com>, AHackel@nycourts.gov <AHackel@nycourts.gov>, press@nycourts.gov <press@nycourts.gov>
CC: Michael Volpe <mvolpe998@gmail.com>, Rick LaRivière <RickLaRiviere@proton.me>, Dick LaFontaine <RALafontaine@protonmail.com>, Modern Thomas Nast <mthomasnast@protonmail.com>, Frankie Pressman <frankiepressman@protonmail.com>, juliea005 <juliea005@proton.me>, Michael Phillips <mikethunderphillips@gmail.com>, dave@fraudwarrior.org <dave@fraudwarrior.org>, Jill Jones-Soderman <director@fcvfc.org>Attorney Faulkner and OCA Press Office,
We are independent journalists preparing a story for publication on the ongoing Ulster Family Court Ambush of Helen Garber. The public record, party emails, and transcripts show outrageous irregularities that read like a courtroom sting: a sealed petition weaponized by ex parte email, a vanishing block of sworn testimony, conflicting police paperwork, and a judge telling observers there is “no First Amendment” in the courtroom — followed by watchdog David Weigel’s ejection for objecting.
We are offering you a fair shot to respond on the record. Please answer the following:
Core Questions
Ex Parte Use of a Sealed Petition
Did Ms. Faulkner send Judge Schreibman a same-day email forwarding Ms. Garber’s sealed petition and urging an “emergency” contempt hearing? On what authority may counsel disclose and argue a sealed filing to a judge outside adversarial notice? Does OCA view this as permissible under 22 NYCRR 100.3/RPC 3.5/3.6/3.8?AFC Participation in Irregular Process
Why did Ms. Harp (AFC) join the request to accelerate contempt on the same day as the sealed filing, rather than insist on ordinary notice and a neutral, evidence-based hearing? What statutory basis did the AFC rely on?Transcript Gap / “Complete” Certification
The June 18, 2024 transcript omits ~30 minutes of post-lunch testimony/cross that both sides referenced on the record. Why is the reporter’s certification not “complete”? Where is the missing audio/log? Will OCA produce the audio capture and the steno writer’s notes to reconcile the record?Witnesses Silenced
Three defense witnesses were present and not allowed to testify. What procedural rule justified excluding them while admitting hearsay-driven argument to brand Garber a child abuser?Police Report vs. Evidence
The June 10, 2024 weapon-seizure paperwork lists the wrong time, the wrong location, and omits witnesses, yet was cited to support “child trauma” claims. Who will explain the time/location/witness discrepancies? Did the court or counsel communicate with deputies regarding the narrative?Watchdog Suppression / Courtroom Ejection
Observers report the judge announced, “There is no First Amendment in this courthouse… this is a closed court,” before ejecting citizen-watchdog David Weigel. On what legal basis were press/public barred and a critic removed? Does OCA endorse this policy for family-related proceedings that are otherwise subject to limited but reviewable closure?Forum Shift from Judge Rakov to Justice Schreibman
Who requested the shift from Family Court (Rakov) to Supreme (Schreibman)? Provide the written order and findings supporting the transfer and vacatur of the temporary order of protection. What case-assignment rule or emergency protocol applies?Remedies / Corrections
Will the court correct the transcript, re-open the record, or schedule a de novo evidentiary hearing with witnesses under oath? Will OCA audit this case for ex parte, record integrity, and public-access compliance?We intend to publish shortly. If we do not receive your response by press time, we will incorporate any responses received in a follow-up.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Regards,
Richard Luthmann
Writer, Journalist, and Commentator
Tips or Story Ideas: (239) 631-5957
richard.luthmann@protonmail.com
LINKTREE
Muck Rack Profile
Substack: This is For Real.
Editor-In-Chief: FLGulf.news
Editor-In-Chief: NYNewsPress.com
Editor-In-Chief: TheFamilyCourtCircus.com
Contributor: Frank Report
Contributor: Sun Bay Paper
Follow Me on Facebook X Instagram LinkedIn TRUTH Rumble Newsbreak
The Garber case is not just a one-off “rough justice” scenario; it may be symptomatic of deeper rot in the county’s courts. Evidence goes missing. Transcripts are altered. Proceedings are closed off. And when a concerned citizen like Weigel cries foul, he’s met with handcuffs and expulsion rather than answers.
Is this justice, or a judicial protection racket? As this explosive case heads into public view, many are asking why the Ulster County courts seem so desperate to keep prying eyes away. What exactly is happening behind those closed courtroom doors? How did a mother seeking help end up vilified and financially crushed, her voice literally erased from the record?
The integrity of Ulster County’s legal system now hangs in a cloud of suspicion. Court officials have so far remained tight-lipped, but the evidence of misconduct is mounting. Helen Garber’s fight is no longer just about her own case – it’s become a rallying cry.
What is the Ulster County judiciary hiding, and who will hold them to account? The people of Ulster County, and anyone who cares about the rule of law, deserve an answer.
Elizabeth Faulkner is not a good person. She should not have used the courts to give custody to the abuser and separate a child from their mother. I believe that attorneys who engage in this type of conduct should be disbarred, at the very least.
Sometimes these lawyers do not act alone. Hillary Applegate is working with her mother to turn litigants and their children into slaves. They direct them to submit to their will and collect free profits from their labor. They will use hacking to put an invisible collar over her victim’s neck.
Applegate and her degenerate mother expect complete compliance for all of their demands. This is how modern-day slavery works. You work in the salt mines and your children sexually cater to the pedophiles of the Houghton’s choosing.
They have a gang of shitty and violent animals that will take your health if ruining your life through hacking doesn’t suffice in terminating your attempts to protect your children. You would be hard pressed to find filthier people than the Houghton’s. They all belong in prison.