In an e-mail late last night (July 28), Natalie Malonis responded to an earlier post on this blog that suggested she may have been behind the leak several days ago of a CASA report that contained confidential information about her client, Teresa Jeffs, and that she waited too long to file a motion to seal the Report:
“The CASA report did not come from me, and I am not the one who sent it around to the media. I do not even have a complete copy of it with attachments myself. If I had filed it, I would have filed it under seal. I did what I could do as quickly as I could.”
On Saturday, July 19, the day after the CASA Report appeared in the press, the Houston Chronicle reported:
Vicki Vines, a clerk with the Tom Green County District Court clerk’s office said she did not know if the CASA report had been filed by mid afternoon Friday.
But Natalie Malonis, the girl’s court-appointed attorney, confirmed the report had been filed with the court in San Angelo.
“I hate that it’s come to this but hopefully now my client and I can get our relationship away from public scrutiny and back on track and start going forward.”
Part of my original post — relying on this Hou Chron excerpt — suggested that Malonis must have known about the leak while there was still time to file a motion to seal on Friday. The opposite is also possible: that as Malonis now asserts, she did what she could do as quickly as she could do it.
It is unclear, however, why Malonis would not have expressed distress about the leak on Friday or, if she did, why the Hou Chron would not have reported such an expression. It would not be the first time that a newspaper edited out a critical piece of a discussion with an interviewee. I hasten to add that I have not asked Malonis about this nor, so far, has she offered clarification on this point.
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
Frimble 07.29.08 at 8:14 am
Natalie:
Did a Court ever grant a restraining order against you?
Have you had an order or a ruling issued by the Tarrant County Court that restricted your right to have overnight access to your children?
Has any mental health professional ever diagnosed you with a personality disorder or psychiatric condition?
Have you spent time in a psychiatric hospital, or the psychiatric ward of a hospital in the past 10 years?
How many family law cases have you been lead counsel on in the past 3 years and in what Texas counties were they filed?
What professional background do you have that qualifies you as “specializing” in high conflict custody cases?
These are simple, straight forward questions. Challenge: Answer them clearly and specifically.
Frimble 07.29.08 at 8:51 am
Jeny: Thanks. Your constant references to Mike Nifong are distracting, though. You mention him in almost every one of your posts.
Jeny 07.29.08 at 8:53 am
PS. I don’t believe a single word that comes from Natalie Bush’s mouth (or her late-night posts here).
Ms. Bush has proven herself to be untrustworthy and a liar, in my own personal opinion.
Jeny 07.29.08 at 9:05 am
Frimble: There is a reason. Ms. Bush-Malonis’ extrajudicial behavior is very, very similar to that of the now disbarred, disgraced and broke Nifong.
If you followed that case closely at all (and I did), you would easily see the parallels.
In my opinion purely, I predict Ms. Bush-Malonis will eventually be held accountable for her untethical behavior as was Mr. Nifong.
I don’t tell you how to post, please don’t do the same to me.
Thanks.
pc 07.29.08 at 11:23 am
Frimble: Great questions! Wow . You must be looking at the same documents I’ve seen in the Tarrant County records you are right on track. Now lets see how Malonis lies her way out of this one.
Kim 07.29.08 at 11:28 am
Jeny,
I must agree with Frimble the constant mention of Nifong is distracting. One must wonder what your personal vendetta against Ms. Malonis is…. You claim that Ms. Malonis has ‘proven’ to be untrustworthy and in the same sentence you state ‘personal opinion’. Your past posting history with Ms. Malonis comes in question – I’m quite confident that there are other venues more appropriate than this blog for you to continue your fight with her. Please don’t subject the rest of us to your personal ugly past with Ms. Malonis.
Also, your double negative in your other post suggests that you’d like Frimble to give you posting pointers. I feel many of us could learn from Frimble’s wise, calm, and well written posting style.
Jeny 07.29.08 at 12:16 pm
Kim:
Is this your blog? Or does it belong to Mr. Kurt Schulske? Has he asked you to invite me to leave? If not, please refrain from this distracting and irritating behavior.
You don’t care for my postings, that’s clear enough. If you don’t like ‘em, don’t read ‘em. It’s just that simple.
As for the long leaps off tall buildings you’ve taken with great liberty, I hate to disappoint you but I live in Georgia. I have NO “ugly past” with Ms. Malonis. I have never met the woman. I have never had any kind of personal (or otherwise) contact with her.
How you drew the the conclusion that I have an “ugly past” with Natalie Malonis is beyond me.
I do not have any kind of personal vendetta against Ms. Malonis–aside from the fact I *do* take great issue with her unethical, hypocritcal behavior with regards to Teresta Jeffs, the FLDS and their innocent children.
PS. I see no “double negatives” in my posting. Perhaps you need your eyeglass Rx refreshed?
Have a wonderful day!!
kbp 07.29.08 at 1:30 pm
AH! The minor success of Natalie’s move is to stir disagreement amongst those that oppose her!
kbp 07.29.08 at 1:43 pm
Back to the topic.
Natalie in no way responsible for the CASA Report leak?
Sure, and pigs fly! LOL!!!!
She confirmed it was filed, therefore she knew it was coming.
If Natalie does respond, a few answers are in order on her conduct as it relates specifically to the YFZ case and Teresa:
Did she lie to her client in the June 20 email she sent Teresa or is she communicating privately (off the record?) with Judge walther?
Did she communicate to another that “…I look forward [to] terrific opportunities for… engagement… in a court of law… into the FLDS”, the result of which Teresa would then actually be a defendant?
(FYI: I have the IP addresses)
************
June 2, 2008:
“The agreement would have given time for DNA testing to come back. That, she argues, was a critical component in her case because her client is a mother to a child in custody being cared for by another person. “Ad Litem requested that the court await the outcome of DNA results before entering an order so that a person entitled to possession could be properly identified for each infant in custody.”
No sealed ever by Natalie!!
So we’re back to her claim on that CASA report of “If I had filed it, I would have filed it under seal.”
That line illustrates a pattern of her practice in this case we must consider.
The last question, for now, is why did she not MOVE TO SEAL all she had to present that day, why did she instead provide the WORLD the PUBLIC RECORD that Natalie’s client was just a 16 year old mother hiding a baby, a person that the public would then judge as being not much better than a prostitute off the street?
Again, I’ll point out that she knew it was coming, confirmed it had been filed. The record shows that CASA, CPS and the raid crew is evidently sharing all they have with Natalie.
Her claim of “I do not even have a complete copy of it with attachments myself” is rather weak when compared to all she has had access to.
I will admit that it is my opinion someone from above is guiding her. The emails she has sent do not indicate she’s all that sharp on remembering the details all in the public know of.
Jeny 07.29.08 at 1:53 pm
Kdp: “I will admit that it is my opinion someone from above is guiding her. The emails she has sent do not indicate she’s all that sharp on remembering the details all in the public know of.”
She remembers the details–she’s just banking on the public forgetting every word she’s said publcly about this case. She’s discovering the internet can be her friend–or her enemy.
In her situation, with the Pajamahadeen on the case, it is her enemy. Everything is perfectly preserved and ready to be served back to her on a silver platter.
Even if she “forgets”.
Frimble 07.29.08 at 5:07 pm
Sorry I offended, Jeny.
Hugh McBryde 07.29.08 at 5:56 pm
There’s always the possibility that she is being set up as a patsy. She’s either the leak, or too stupid to know she’s being used.
Jeny 07.29.08 at 7:39 pm
Frimble: No worries. I know I’ve done my share of offending too. And I apologize as well.
*hug*
Jeny