A San Diego County, California judge is ready to perform a Mengele like experiment on two kids currently living in Arizona.
Recapping Bryan Mineo
Bryan Mineo has barely seen his two kids, now five and six, but the judge, Renee Stackhouse, presiding over his case is ready to switch custody and let him take care of them full time.
Mineo is a familiar name to long time readers of Michael Volpe Investigates. He previously ran the swimming non-profit One With the Ocean (OWO), while taking an exorbitant salary, up to 70% of donations.
In 2024, he resigned, and his replacement at the top told me she’d take no salary.
The custody case
While he was creating a mess in the swimming world, he was also fighting a protracted child custody case with ex-wife, Courtney Clifford.
Courtney currently lives in Arizona with the two kids.
All seemed fine a few years ago, when a settlement was reached.
Mineo wasn’t interested in caring for his kids- a couple years ago he was galivanting in the Cayman Islands.
Back then, he was represented in his divorce by Raj Matani, who made a halfhearted attempt to sue me.
The shark lawyer
Now, he’s taking custody seriously with a new shark lawyer- Catie Young.
Young has spent the last several months convincing Judge Stackhouse that Courtney is destroying Bryan’s relationship with his kids.
Young and Mineo didn’t respond to an email and voicemail for comment.
“Either the court acts now to repair the relationship with father, or the relationship will likely be damaged forever,” Young stated to the judge melodramatically in a June 2026 hearing.
Bryan has spent scant time with his children, but when he’s attempted to take them for custody time, that has often also led to disaster.
The June hearing followed one such exchange, when the kids became despondent and refused to go with him.
Along with being an absentee father, there were allegations of abuse.
In one incident from approximately three years ago, he pushed his daughter down a slide and she broke her leg. Bryan didn’t take his daughter to the hospital; Courtney took her after getting her daughter several hours later.
He was also accused of forcing his daughter to eat dirt.
The court and social services never substantiated abuse.
Despite that history, Young pegged Courtney as the problem.
At a follow up July 20, 2026, hearing, she stated, “And I understand that these children become emotionally disorientated, but the allegations and claims that comes from these children’s mouth, it is very troubling. It is very troubling what is happening, and the children need just some reprieve. They need to be able to not have contact with mom right now (emphasis mine), and there needs to be able -- we need to repair this relationship with the father.”
Judge Stackhouse goes full Mengele
During the June hearing, Judge Stackhouse told the parties she was leaning toward switching custody and letting Bryan have the kids full time.
She wanted to see what would happen at the next exchange, July 13, 2026.
At this exchange, Courtney didn’t show up; instead, her uncle came.
The kids became despondent again and refused to go.
Young still blamed Courtney, stating the following in the July 20, 2026, hearing.
There is no discernable basis that the Court has received for the children to have such a strong reaction spending time with father.
There is nothing in the record that substantiates or supports the extreme reaction to father.
The judge was ready to take drastic action, however, Courtney’s attorney, Art LaCilento, pushed back.
Art argued that the court was trying to change custody without an evidentiary hearing.
The court had held hearings where lawyers made arguments, however, an evidentiary hearing has witnesses and evidence.
Art noted in the July hearing.
At this point, your Honor, we are asking that the visitation remain the same. If the Court is inclined to flip, I would be asking for a stay, because if the Court was to, then I also invoke 917.7 CCP as well, because that could be potential removal out of state where they are, and there are all the due process considerations of a potential move away, Burgess, LaMusga and all that.
The main issue is 3041. If the Court is inclined to go that way, we are demanding an evidentiary hearing in the best interest of the children.
(917.7 refers to an appeal and Mr. LaCilento would ask for a pause while the appeal played out. 3041 refers to custody awarded to non-parents.)
Courtney declined to comment when reached by email, while Art did not respond to an email for comment.
Ms. Young argued that the parties had several opportunities to ask for an evidentiary hearing and didn’t ask for one.
Whoever is correct on the law, the judge wants to rip two kids from their lives in Arizona send them to California without hearing from any witnesses.
Art successfully argued that a minor’s counsel was recently appointed and should be heard from before a custody determination is made.
That minor’s counsel, Erica Bloom, was chosen by Young.
Judge Stackhouse then went full Mengele. She was not going to grant custody to Bryan Mineo, but rather his parents.
They live in Maine but have agreed, according to the judge, to buy property in California.
“The Court has taken into account the children's best interest to protect their health, safety, and wellbeing and finds that right now with the information that it has moving forward as just explained, in the best interest of the children transitioning them through grandparents back to father (emphasis mine),” Judge Stackhouse stated.
Ignoring history
The directive is reminiscent of the Rucki case from Minnesota, where Judge David Knutson granted custody to the paternal aunt on September 7, 2012.
In that case, the two oldest girls- Samantha and Gianna Rucki- ran on April 19, 2013, rather than living with their abusive father.
In 2021, Megan Fox of PJ Media covered Burkhard V Adkins, where Katrina Adkins was trying force her way back into her kids’ lives, after struggling for years with drug addiction.
The kids in that case similarly resisted. A court appointee called the cops during a session.
In one article, Megan interviewed Dr. Michael Gombatz, who said forced reunification was dangerous.
“Any coercion will FAIL by an attorney, judge, therapist, and even the caring parent, in this case, Dad,” he said. “The children have had no control and must be given the dignity of control…Kids in control, unless horribly damaged, will generally move in a positive direction.”
The phrase “best interests of the children” becomes meaningless when courts use it to justify ripping children from stability while refusing to meaningfully test the evidence. If Mineo is safe, prove it through witnesses, records, cross-examination, child interviews, expert testimony, and a real evidentiary hearing. If the mother is supposedly the problem, prove that too. But do not run a California family-court lab experiment on two small kids because a shark lawyer says “alienation” loudly enough. Volpe is right to invoke the Rucki warnings and forced-reunification disasters. Children are not chess pieces. Grandparents should not become a bridge to an alleged abuser because a judge wants to force a relationship back into existence.
If a child is in fear of a parent, the judge should look at the evidence. I had a judge in Texas back in the 1980's who upon request talked to my 2 daughters in his chambers with his clerk present. The girls were 6 & 4 years old. They had no problem telling the judge what they saw and what they wanted. Judges should be required to visit with the kids upon request. Kids are very smart and should be listened to by the judge who is the finder of facts. When a judge refuses to look at the evidence, they should not be on the bench. This mom has made the kids available but there are serious problems with the behavior of the father towards the kids which causes the kids not to want to go stay with him. If a parent is not consistent, loving and patient with the kids, they will not want to be with that parent. It's the parent that is the problem, not the kids.