Systemic Corruption and Child Endangerment in Mecklenburg Family Court

Charlotte, NC — We, as aggrieved victims and concerned citizens, have tragically witnessed countless innocent children and domestic violence survivors being unjustly harmed due to the pervasive corruption and favoritism in the Mecklenburg County Family Court system.

Judges Christy Mann, Jena Culler, Alyssa Levine, Karen McCallum and Rhonda Patterson have repeatedly demonstrated bias that victimizes protective mothers while shielding abusive fathers from accountability. Instead of protecting children, these judges often harm children, and penalize mothers for showing distress or fear — responses that stem directly from trauma and abuse.

The result is a devastating pattern: abusive parents gain increased custody or full custody, while protective parents lose their children. This practice violates the spirit and purpose of family law, which is to serve the best interests of the child.

Constitutional parents rights are repeatedly violated in Mecklenburg County Family Court. 

The widespread implementation of “50/50 custody” —  in cases involving domestic violence — is not a fair or safe outcome. It prioritizes optics and convenience over the child’s emotional and physical safety. The system’s bias toward maintaining paternal rights has created a dangerous imbalance.

Victims report that family court judges routinely ignore evidence of abuse, demean and criminalize mothers, jail mothers, and engage in victim-blaming behaviors. Lawyers, parent coordinators and agencies such as the Department of Social Services (DSS) have failed to intervene effectively, often deferring to judicial authority rather than the welfare of children.

The North Carolina State Bar and Judicial Standards Committee dismissed nearly all complaints of judicial misconduct, attorney misconduct and corruption. NC State Bar systematically dismisses 99.8% of all complaints. 

This deeply flawed system has led to irreversible harm — and, in some cases, the loss of young lives. The situation in Mecklenburg County demands immediate public scrutiny, independent investigation, and reform.

We urge citizens, media, and advocacy organizations to speak out, document their experiences, and call for accountability from those entrusted with protecting families.

We hereby call upon the proper authorities to conduct thorough investigations into the Mecklenburg county family court, particularly the practices of Judges Jena Culler, Christy Mann, Alyssa Levine, Rhonda Patterson and Karen McCallum. We demand an immediate halt to their power to decide over family cases until the investigation is complete. We implore the authorities to implement systemic changes that prioritize children's and victims' rights, protect domestic violence victims, and ensure fairness and justice in every family case. Our children's lives and our community's future depend on it. Please, sign this petition to help achieve a better, safer, and fairer Mecklenburg.

 

Documented Cases: 

 

JUDGE JENA P. CULLER

Allegations against Judge Jena P. Culler include claims of systemic bias against mothers, demeaning comments about women, serious harm to children, and violations of law and constitutional rights. Culler is criticized for minimizing abusive behavior by fathers and blaming mothers, reminiscent of outdated attitudes when “boys will be boys” and victims were blamed. It seems Culler still stereotypes women as crazy and refuses to believe them. Many local lawyers advice victims to remain in danger of injuries, not get protective orders, because Culler won’t issue any and will take child away from victim . Outdated myths such as “parental alienation” appear to remain in effect, while minimal consideration is given to children’s safety and well-being. Judge Culler’s rulings also appear to be statistically skewed in favor of male litigants.

A separate change.org +400 signature petition calls for Judge Culler’s removal and blames Judge Culler for child’s death. The comments in the “Remove Jena Culler” change.org petition are emotionally charged calling Judge Jena Culler: “anti-mother”, “anti-child”, “toxic”, “visibly hates women”, “rude”, “gives children to abusers”, “devil”, “does not look for child’s best interest”, “blames mothers”, “power hungry judge” etc.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals has frequently reversed and remanded Judge Culler’s orders. Only about 33% of her cases have been affirmed. Would you trust a judge who gets two out of three cases wrong?

Case: Jaheim Richardson. According to multiple online sources, Judge Jena P. Culler has faced criticism in connection with the death of 16-month-old Jaheim Richardson, after allegedly awarding custody to an abusive parent. Commentators have also accused her of showing a lack of remorse following the incident. A County News 4 You article reported that Jaheim’s autopsy indicated he weighed 28 pounds and measured 32 inches in height, with blunt-force injuries to his head and chest, as well as healing burns to his scrotum and buttocks. The article described the case as one of prolonged abuse, witnessed by the child’s siblings, and criticized what it characterized as indifference from the court. The same publication also linked Judge Culler to another case involving the death of a four-year-old child.

Case No. 20CVD014012-590, Meade vs. Meade: Judge Culler found that Father was recording calls between child and mother, and that father speaks to mother using “vulgar and demeaning language”. Judge Culler had alcohol concerns regarding mother. She found “Both parties are fit and proper persons to have temporary custody of the child”. Yet, Culler gave Father 94% parenting time, and mother only 6% (every other weekend, 1 overnight). This outcome is starkly different to another case, where Judge Culler gave a father every weekend custody, after finding that father physically abused his child and had alcohol issues. When Culler had alcohol concerns about mother, she reduced custody to 1 overnight every second weekend. When Culler had alcohol and physical violence concerns about a father, she gave that father two overnights every single weekend. These two cases alone point to strong bias against mothers.

Case No. 18CVD005976-590, Matthew Michael: Judge Culler presided over a case where she gave father every single weekend custody, even after finding he was abusive, with alcohol issues. Culler stated no concerns about mothers parenting. Father was on bail for two counts of misdemeanor for child abuse. Judge Culler made factual findings and in her custody order wrote: “ the Court finds that Father has: a. Grabbed (redacted: minor child) by the neck and pinned him up against the wall with his feet off the ground, b. Forcefully put (redacted minor child)  against the house while grabbing his shirt; c. Threw (redacted: minor child)  to the ground, causing his head to hit the ground; d. Kicked (redacted: minor child)  in the middle of the chest while he was on the bed, causing him to almost fall off the bed and with such force that Ms. Harris was concerned that (redacted: minor child)  had been injured; and e. Consumed alcohol while (redacted: minor child)  was in his care, then drove with Aiden after Father had been drinking. “. The order contained no concerns about mother, yet father was awarded every single weekend with the minor child that he was physically abusing. Why did Judge Culler endanger minor child’s life by giving violent father considerable amount of custody?

Case No. 11CVD22286 Dexter Peeler vs Angela Joseph – Judge Culler took child from mothers custody over allergies, where various doctors disagreed on child’s condition. In this custody dispute, mother and father disagreed about child’s dairy and other allergies. Multiple Doctors had varying results, and child had no major health issues. Culler chose and appointed a doctor, deciding that only that doctor is right. She seemingly demeaned the mother and gave custody to father, leaving mother with just every other weekend visitation. (Remember, she gave 2X more custody to alcoholic father who physically abused his child. Why?)

Case No. 23CVD60237 Madigan Shomette vs Michael Needham  - Judge Jena P Culler denied mother and child domestic violence protective order. The husband was accused of 50 to 100 counts of sexual assault, was arrested for rape and is facing civil jury trial for assault, battery, and more. 

Case No. 15CVD20688 James Meyers vs Charlotte Meyers - Court of Appeals overturned judge Culler’s order negatively affecting wife's alimony, stating Culler abused her discretion and failed to make sufficient findings.

Baucom v Vlahos 01-CVD-2295- NC Court of Appeals reversed Judge Jena P Culler order that had left a mother without support for uninsured medical fees. Culler had left father without the responsibility for his childs uninsured medical bills, luckily Court of Appeals fixed the injustice. 

Case #24CV024150 Najee Heard. Judge Jena Culler found that father gets high while taking care of the 4 year old minor child, and expressed “concern” that father gets high during only few days a month that he has the child. She also was concerned of fathers 4 guns that weren't safely locked. Culler still gave the drug addict father custody of every second weekend. She knowingly placed child in danger. Again the double standard its evident as Culler takes children away from mothers she suspects of drug or alcohol use. Repeatedly Culler minimizes the father’s dangerous behaviors that lead to hurt children, and in at least one case, child death. 

Case #24CV012291 Gonzalez. Judge Culler gave every weekend custody to father who was previously found by court guilty of domestic violence. Father’s violence was in front of minor child, showing that he had no care for child and traumatized child. The domestic violence judge gave very little supervised visitation. Judge Culler blamed mother and placed burden of arranging visitation onto mother. Jena Culler again minimized the violence, abuse, trauma to child and mother. She rewarded abuser with every weekend custody, placed week day school responsibility onto mother, and robbed mother of weekend activities. Jena Culler has repeatedly minimized actions of violent abusers, endangering children and victimizing mothers. Children sentenced by Culler to life with abuser will forever be damaged. Mecklenburg Court has training on Domestic Violence, however Judge Culler simply ignores it all and favors the abusers. 

 

 

JUDGE CHRISTY C. MANN 

Judge Christy T Mann has served over 19 years as a Judge. Online, victims have accused Judge Mann of bias against women, favoritism for abusive or alcoholic fathers, arrogance, demeaning remarks towards litigants and ignoring the law.

Case No. 13CVD022084-590, Hidalgo M. vs. Matthew James Rosenfield. Judge Mann is accused of unconstitutionally taking away custody from mother in sole effort to force the mother to relocate back to North Carolina. Judge Mann is accused of ignoring evidence of father’s domestic violence against mother and child, as well as father’s criminal felonious records. Recently, Mother then filed numerous requests for custody stating child is in serious danger, however Judge Mann denied all requests and refused to hear it. (Yet Judge Mann has granted plenty unproven ex parte pleadings when fathers requested such). Judge Mann is also accused of letting a lawyer, Sabrina Blain, to write the Court order. Mother accuses Sabrina Blain of serious attorney misconduct: drastically changing judges verbal ruling, lack of civility and lying.

Case No. 25CV033351-590 Hatcher Tonarian vs. M. Brown – Judge Mann received a hand written ex parte motion where father accused mother of “parental alienation”. Judge Mann granted full temporary custody to father and set a hearing to 3 weeks later. At the hearing, she found both parents fit and ordered shared custody. It appears, mother was deprived of her children without a real reason. (At almost same time, Mariajose Hidalgo pleaded ex parte custody for her childs safety, but Judge Mann denied it. Why did Judge Mann grant this father full ex parte custody?)

Case of Terra Powers: Mann left a stay at home mom with $0, and let father keep millions, allegedly in favoritism of lawyer Bill Diehl. Such ruling significantly impacted children’s well-being, as mother struggled and father lived in riches.

 

Case No. 21CVD001975-590 Jason Michael Defonce Vs A.F. Defonce: The mother had a domestic violence protective order against father. Judge Christy Mann found father to be “disrespectful and mouthy”, at times “reckless”. Yet, Judge Mann blamed mother for child being sick more often in her care. It seems Judge Mann is completely unaware that children tend to be sicker at the safe parents home, as their adrenaline and fears let down. So many parents have long shared that children fall ill in their homes after coming back from abusers house. Judge Mann went on to demean and belittle mother in her order stating “Mother is still trying to figure out what she wants to do when she grows up”. A sign of gender-based bias. Despite the domestic violence, the father got equal custody. The father was also allowed to suppress his income in efforts to reduce child support.

Case No COA24-710, NC Court of Appeals, A. Steward vs. Daniel Brickman: The Court of Appeals reversed Judge Mann ruling ordering a mother to pay $75,000 in attorney fees to father.  Judge Mann ordered the mother to pay $75,000 or go to jail, issuing an order for mother’s arrest. If mother would have not paid, she would have sat in jail due to an erroneous order. After Judge Mann issued order for mothers arrest, Parent Coordinator Tia Hartley issued a directive to take children’s custody day away from mother. When mother disagreed, Judge Mann held mother in criminal contempt and sentenced her to 30 days in jail. Judge Mann suspended this sentence for a year placing mother on “probation”. All events that started with an order that was not compliant with NC State laws. Is judge Mann criminalizing mothers?

Case No, 16CVD016819-590, Pham vs. Phelc – Another case that reached the NC Court of Appeals. This time, NC Court of Appeals found that Judge Christy T. Mann had no jurisdiction to issue the orders and jail a litigant (in other words, Judge Mann should have never heard or ruled on such case, acting outside of her powers). This case centered around an equitable distribution order, whereas Judge Mann awarded immigrant litigant money and attorney fees, as well as immigration related monetary awards. Judge Mann then held hearing of contempt to force the payments. The very hearing that NC Court of Appeals found to be outside of Mann’s jurisdiction. Judge Mann sentenced the elderly man to jail until he pays. He did not pay for 90 days. Judge Mann then resentenced the elderly man to more jail, indefinitely, until he pays. NC Court of Appeals issued an order allowing a release from jail.

Case No. 25CV037349-590 James Patrick Schwartz vs. M. Lovisa- A Father filed an ex parte motion accusing mother of drug use and “false criminal charges”. Judge Mann granted full custody to father, without hearing from mother, and directed law enforcement to take the 11 month old baby. Mother quickly filed a motion submitting evidence to Judge Mann of father’s domestic violence, criminal charges and false claims. Judge Mann denied the mother’s request and deprived the mother from seeing her baby for another 6 weeks. Mother submitted to drug test and proved that she was drug free for at least 3 months (tests are often up to 3 month period). Father’s allegations of drug use were unfounded. Judge Mann held a custody hearing and issued an order of 50/50 custody time for mother and father, finding them both fit parents. Mother was not given an apology, make-up time with her baby and is forced to co-parent with her abuser. Neither father nor Judge Mann were held accountable for their actions.

Case No. 23CV036981-590 Alexander Antonio Martinez vs J. Cedeno: Judge Mann is accused of taking custody away without due process and giving sole custody to father, who accused of domestic violence. A veteran mother (we thank her for her service to our country) had primary custody of the minor child. Father only saw child every second weekend, by his own choice. After father was violent towards mother, she blocked communications in efforts to protect herself and her child. Father allegedly made up false accusations and filed for an emergency custody, asking Judge Mann to take custody away from mother. Judge Mann, the judge who denies similar pleadings when mothers file it, went ahead to give father all that he asked for. She took custody away from mother, and did not give her a chance to attend a hearing, defend herself or reply (we opine such is violation of Constitutional rights which the inferior NC Statutes or Judge Mann simply cannot override). Judge Mann issued an order for law enforcement to go get the minor child, based solely on fathers allegations (zero evidence). What followed was Judge Mann’s categorical recusal to grant custody hearings to mother, delays, and one sided bias approach in favor of the father. Judge Mann’s orders in this case are filled with negative comments against the mother. The minor child was traumatized when Judge Mann directed law enforcement to physically rip the child from the home and mom. Judge Mann hypocrisy is notable - judge Mann  blames mother for requesting well-fare check for the child when the child was with father. Judge Mann’s order is full of presumptions, bias and one sided approach. She is not referencing any actual evidence- all decisions and the made up emergency is solely on fathers allegations (from the filing, a picture emerges of a revengeful abusive father who was going to punish his ex at any means, like taking the most important person from her life. A story way to common in Mann's court). Mann’s orders are not only bias against mother, but also demeaning towards the mother (is Mann re-living her own mom issues?). Fathers violence continues to be ignored. Mothers rights are stripped. Legality of it all is highly questionably. This is how abusive, dangerous and violent parent gets a full custody- a combination of mere allegations and anti-mother corrupted judicial officer. Mann then ordered mother to pay father over $1300 in child support, despite the fact that both parents had similar income levels. Child is in fathers custody and potentially in a very serious danger. The father, nor Judge Mann have been held accountable for their actions.

 

JUDGE ALYSSA LEVINE

 

Judge Alyssa Levine is accused by victims of bias against mothers, demeaning mothers, unlawful rulings, revengeful behavior, and not caring for children’s wellbeing.  Joining Family Court January 2024, judge Alyssa Levine faces unusually high amount of recusal motions. The motions accuse judge Levine of animosity against lawyers based on past history, and bias against litigants. Several of recusal motions, supported by notarized affidavits, mention judge Levine rolling her eyes, clinching her lips and displaying hostile body language.  

Allegedly, judge Levine was investigated by NC Judicial Standards Commission and then moved to Family Court.

The NC Court of Appeals is consistently overturning Levine’s orders. We found five appeal cases, and in all five Judge Alyssa Levine got the law wrong. A 100% error rate? Would you trust this judge? Would you call this judge competent?

Case No. 17CVD007380-590 B. Holden vs S Tanner Holden: Father has been investigated by DSS, and for years the children primarily resided with mother in Charlotte NC. Until Judge Alyssa Levine took the bench as judge over this case. That same year, Judge Alyssa Levine took primary custody away from mother and ordered children to move/live with their father in Kills Devils Hills NC (6 hours away). Father’s law firm, Arnold & Smith, was the firm where judge Alyssa Levine worked prior to becoming a judge (likely where she was friends with the very lawyers in front of her now). Judge Levine ordered mother to pay attorney fees to Arnold & Smith, and accepted claims that mother was not observing court orders. Judge Levine ordered children to be brought to her chambers, where she broke the news to the children that they are being taken away from mother, moved our of their school and community, and away from family and friends they’ve known. A recording was posted in a recusal motion, with horrible heart breaking screams from the two children. Judge Levine is on audio repeating that is it her sole decision. Why did the judge traumatize these kids personally? Further, Judge Levine ordered the mother to read a parenting book and write a book report (which in our opinion is unconstitutional and demeaning of mothers. The Supreme Court has affirmed that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects parents' fundamental right to direct the care and upbringing of their children). Judge Levine refused to recuse herself in light of bias accusations. She continues to preside over the case. In July 2025, Judge Levine re-issued her custody order reaffirming primary custody to father, and regurgitating father’s testimony against mother. Without evidence and proof, Judge Levine blamed mother for harm to well-being (How much trauma do you think Levine caused to these children personally in her chambers?). The renewed custody order appears to be bias and one sided in favor of father, and judges fellow former co-workers.

We could not find any other Levine’s orders that would order fathers to read a parenting book and write a book report.

Case No.COA24-721 Wright v Alston May 2025: NC Court of Appeals found Levine made legal errors when she took custody away from mother. Judge Levine was not held accountable for the damage done due to judicial immunity.

Case No. 10CVD020592-590 John Benard Adams vs. I. Parks: Judge Levine ordered full custody to father, based on fathers testimony and motions, including moot pro se motions. NC Court of Appeals have long stated that pro se filings, when litigant is represented by lawyer, are mood and inadmissible. Judge Levine admitted the pro se father’s ex parte motion, granted him sole custody, despite such motion being legally inadmissible. NC Court of Appeals also states that older children can refuse to go to custodial parent, that parent is not supposed to physically force child to go to other custodial parent, and that physically forcing child who refuses is not in child’s best interest. Judge Levine held an emergency custody hearing after child did not go to father, placed blame on mother and awarded custody to father. The child is 15. It is unclear why Judge Levine ruled the child is in danger of “bodily injury” and of “being abducted”, as she made zero factual findings to support such claim. In any case, it appears the hearing should not even been held since it was initiated based on an inadmissible motion.

 

 

 

JUDGE KAREN MCCALLUM

Judge Karen D. McCallum was moved out of family court end of 2023, after a public outrage by numerous of victims. A change.org petition gained over 1000 signatures stating “NC Judge Karen McCallum gives Abusers Custody of Children and Jails Protective Mothers”. The comments of this petition state Judge McCallum “won’t even look at the evidence”, “uses her personal bias in court”, “finds any way possible to harm mothers” and “allows her favorite lawyers to lie, cheat and steal”.  

A video on social media shows a court hearing whereas Judge McCallum ordered a mother to be jailed for 60 days, because the mother refused to raise her hand during swear in process.

Judge McCallum is accused of giving child to father who was standing in front of her in handcuffs for felony stalking, and whom Judge McCallum herself found to have committed acts of domestic violence against mother.

Victims claim that Judge McCallum showed favoritism and even ignored the law to help her fellow friends, lawyers accused of gross misconduct and corruption: Tamala Walace and Sabrina Blain. Judge McCallum’s court rooms were said to be filled with scandals.

Videos of judge McCallum’s hearings show that she would once in a while lift her hair to listen…

Case No. COA22-531, NC Court of Appeals, Tillman v.s. Jenkins: NC Court of Appeals vacated and remanded Judge McCallum’s custody order, ruling it unconstitutional. Judge McCallum violated mother’s constitutional rights when she took custody away from the mother. As many other orders, Judge McCallum was evading appeals by keeping her custody order “temporary” for over three years. Such delay angered NC Court of Appeals: “The chronic temporary,  and  thus interlocutory, orders have evaded appellate review and avoided addressing whether Mother is unfit or has acted inconsistently with her parental rights”.

Case No. COA21-204, Preston vs. Preston - NC Court of Appeals. In dissenting opinion, Judge Tyson critiqued Judge McCallum’s $15,000 sanction against a mother as unlawful.

In another NC Court of Appeals case, Judge Karen D. McCallum was challenged for violating mother’s constitutional due process rights, unlawfully imposing sanctions against mother, favoritism for attorney Sabrina Blain and depriving child of due child support.

 

JUDGE RODERICK DAVIS was moved to family court in April 2024, replacing Judge Henderson. This was mere months after, according to news articles, he pled guilty for criminal charges of “misdemeanor notary crimes”. Judge Davis left family court in January 2025, and Judge Gary Henderson returned. Was Judge Davis moved to family court due to his misdemeanor crime? Why?

We received several complaints against Judges Gary Henderson and Rex Marvel, however have not been able to substantiate such just yet.

In none of the cases we researched, did we find Judges reprimanding attorneys for misconduct. However several attorneys were under investigation for misconduct by NC State Bar.

While some news articles covered family court cases, we found that the local news channels were more inclined to cover harmed animal cases vs. how Judges harmed children and victims of domestic violence. We urge the media outlets to shed light on family court. 

We call to remove from family court judges Jena Culler, Alyssa Levine and Christy Mann.

We call for accountability among all judges to ensure that parents’ constitutional rights are protected, that rulings are free from bias, and that every decision aligns with the rule of law.