Bias in Motion
Victim-blaming in one of Linn County’s most notorious, ongoing child kidnapping cases
There are disturbing new developments in the criminal perjury and custodial interference case against Albany, Oregon attorney Kyla Mazhary-Clark.
Mazhary-Clark lied in family court to gain custody of another woman’s two young children. She admitted to those lies in a subsequent deposition. That is, we do not need to use the word “allegedly” here, re the perjury. She did it.
Given that Mazhary-Clark is not related to these two children, and given that her custody order was obtained through fraud, she is a de facto kidnapper, and should be regarded as such. It sure would be swell if she could also be charged as such.
Until then, we are left to gawk at the wheels-off, sparks everywhere simultaneous shitshows unfolding in both the criminal and civil cases, and wonder, how the hell did it come to this?
Everything began to flare up on June 14th, when Mazhary-Clark’s defense team filed some sealed (non-public) documents, and a hearing was hastily scheduled for that same day. I was unable to observe that proceeding.
A few days later, the same material was filed, unsealed, in the custody case, and a hearing set for the following week, which was as quickly as it could be scheduled. In that filing, Mazhary-Clark alleged that the children’s real mother, Jamie Crompton, was being investigated by DHS and Salem Police for child sexual abuse. The attorney stated that the children were in immediate danger.
Due to my regular checking of these dockets, I saw this all unfold in real time, and on the day of the hearing in the custody case — Monday, June 24th — I saw that Mazhary-Clark’s attorney, Andy Ivers, had withdrawn his emergency motion at the last moment, and the hearing had been cancelled.
When contacted, Crompton stated that on the Friday before the hearing, law enforcement had officially cleared her of the abuse allegations. Clearly Ivers knew that and withdrew his motion — and since he was evidently collaborating with Mazhary-Clark’s defense team, those other attorneys knew it also.
I read the police report: The children were not sexually abused by their mother Jamie Crompton, or while in her care or presence. That begs the question, did someone else abuse these children, or were they coached?
Coming back to the criminal case, more material was filed by the defense the week after Ivers called off the emergency, including a motion for an extension of deadlines. That motion referenced the already discredited sexual abuse allegations, and remarked on the criminal hearing held June 14th:
“During this hearing, [Judge Sheryl Bachart] also acknowledged that additional discovery would need to be conducted in light of the DHS investigation and Salem Police investigation into child abuse allegations against Jamie Crompton, a key figure in the State’s prosecution.”
Read that a few times and make a mental list of all the things wrong with it. Let’s start with the fact that Mazhary-Clark’s attorneys should not be perpetuating false and discredited allegations about one of their client’s victims — and they particularly should not be doing so for their own case advantage.
Those attorneys should withdraw their secret/sealed filings, like Ivers did, and get the false allegations stricken from the record. They won’t do that, because it is apparently their intention to prejudice the judge by repeating the false allegations.
That’s already proven effective because veteran Judge Bachart apparently decided that rumors of child abuse by Crompton were somehow relevant to the criminal case against Mazhary-Clark, and will allow additional discovery related to it.
Let me clear this up for everyone: Those allegations were not then and are not now relevant; and even if Jamie Crompton was charged with child abuse, it would still not be relevant to the matter of Kyla Mazhary-Clark’s criminal perjury and custodial interference. It’s incredibly disturbing that the court thinks otherwise.
Mazhary-Clark’s attorneys have created a disturbing situation for their client’s victim: The criminal case had already become a de facto custody case, but it is now becoming a de facto criminal case against the mother.
Basically, they’re inventing a whole new criminal-criminal-custody-case turducken in which Mazhary-Clark gets to, once again, argue the unfitness of Crompton, while Crompton is, once again, forced to defend herself. Maintaining such a constant defense position comes at a tremendous financial and psychological expense.
That this blame-shifting is being allowed to happen should terrify everyone: Oregon courts are apparently powerless to deal with perjury, fraudulently-obtained court orders, kidnapping, and now this weaponizing of the police and child protective services.
“Kyla just keeps being allowed to pull all this crap and there’s literally nothing I can do,” Crompton states. “I feel like my children were rehomed like pets, and the more I fight to get them back, the more disgusting tactics are used to try to break me.”
Mazhary-Clark’s defense team is also questioning the statute of limitations on the counts of perjury. Such a challenge may provide them with a quick escape hatch for those more serious charges. The thought of such a “win” would be infuriating, given the fact that she has already admitted her guilt.
In other news, Mazhary-Clark opened her own solo practice last month. One would hope that she — an admitted liar — was asked by her former partners to take her energy elsewhere.
But if those lawyers really wanted to wash her stink off their hands, they’d withdraw from the custody case with the same speed and noise that they withdrew their emergency motion.
Neither Ms. Mazhary-Clark nor her various attorneys responded to my request for comments.
