The Unknown Episode 47

There were more fireworks in Idaho.

Richard Luthmann and I were back for the 47th episode of The Unknown.

We discussed the latest on tariffs, Jeffrey Epstein, Ukraine, and more in the current events segment.

What the Hales

The What the Hales segment started thirty-one minutes in; we laughed at Jeremy Hales after he issued a second baseless threat to intercede in my child custody case.

Speaking of baseless, that’s how an Ohio magistrate characterized Hales’ latest attempt for contempt in his equally baseless protective order against his Florida neighbors, John Cook and Michelle Preston. He is also suing both for defamation and other matters in two simultaneous frivolous lawsuits.

Idaho ignores custodial interference laws

Fifty-eight minutes in, Richard and I continued discussing the July 7, 2025, Idaho Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force hearing.

One of the witnesses was Meridian, Idaho Police Chief Tracy Basterrechea.

Basterrechea, answering a question from Republican Representative Barbara Ehardt, explained what his officers could do if a parent was flagrantly keeping a child away in violation of a court order.

“One party picks up the child for their set visitation for a week, or maybe a month. When it’s time they either don’t show up or they refuse to return that child. We don’t have the ability to make them give that child back because it is civil matter.” He said.

He further said prosecutors and attorneys have given the same advice.

This statement is false, and possibly perjurious. Idaho statute makes custodial interference, which he described, a crime, and possibly a felony.

It’s not a civil matter, and police should be able to arrest someone who is flagrantly committing this crime.

When the broadcast aired, I had reached out to the Meridian PD but received no response. They provided the following statement after the broadcast.

As the Chief explained, there are times police get a warrant, which is usually when we can prove a danger to the child. In most of these cases, parents understand the code very well and claim they are taking the action to protect the child from some sort of imminent danger and or they withhold the child and return them at the 24-hour mark. Decisions to make an arrest without a warrant are discussed with prosecutors if we are going to arrest without a warrant. Practically speaking, criminal charges are rarely filed in these cases. These cases are sent to prosecutors for review, and if you look in the Idaho repository, it is rare that criminal charges are filed. That is a decision made by prosecutors and the court system, not law enforcement.

None of this Chief Basterrechea mentioned in the hearing and the hypothetical involved a flagrant violation of the law, meaning keeping the child willfully past the twenty-four-hour mark.

Both parents would understand the statute; the aggrieved parent would also wait until the twenty-four-hour mark.

If there’s a genuine threat to the child, the protective parent should have filed something in court or with the police.

All these variables remain unanswered, however, it’s clear that police and prosecutors have decided to be legislators and don’t treat custodial interference as a crime in Idaho.

Paul Boyne

Richard then updated on Paul Boyne’s ongoing saga, which started 1:06:00 in.

Boyne has been in criminal legal limbo since the summer of 2023 for writing mean blog posts on thefamilycourtcircus.com about Connecticut judges.

While the initial charges are bad enough, what has happened since is even worse. Two years in, no finality is on the horizon, despite his constitutional right to a speedy trial.

More recently, he discovered that in 2020, the Connecticut Judiciary investigated him and produced a ninety-five-page report.

Paul has only received thirteen of those pages in discovery.

This sham prosecution was triggered by a 2022 editorial written by former Connecticut Supreme Court Judge Joette Katz, who has not responded to numerous emails from me.

Recently, I have been the target of an anti-Semitic blog attack that uses vile and threatening language, and suggests that I’ve been the victim of exposure to Zyklon B, the poisonous gas the Nazis used to kill over a million people during the Holocaust. It’s not the first time that I have been attacked, nor threatened, and I am certainly not alone. The blog has expressed anti-Semitic, homophobic, and racist rants against fellow Judges (Judges Robinson, Bozzuto, Adelman, Albis, Murphy Bright, Emons, Coleman, Ficeto, Richards, Pincus, Moukawsher, Grossman, Heller, Nguyen, Olear, Platt, Pressley, Solomon, Carroll, and others), GALs (Steven Dembo and Jocelyn Hurwitz), therapist (Sidney Horowitz), and countless other lawyers simply for doing their respective jobs. I am in good company. But if I were upset at simply being criticized, then I never should have been a public defender, judge, justice, Commissioner or have served in any other public role.

But the blog in question has gone beyond free speech and the Constitutional protections we all enjoy and cherish. At the risk of giving legs to this lunacy, I will refer to just a few quotes from the last year or so, when the blog encouraged violence against many of us who have served roles and taken positions that its author disapproves of. In response to my recent op ed in the Ct. Law Tribune about domestic violence, the blog states in part:

“Children are precious, in need of protection from the domestic terrorism of Jew family court judges, Second Amendment has a purpose, parental discretion chooses the caliber of the shot that lets freedom ring. Jewish judges are a true threat to children. Combat the evil of domestic terrorists per Jewette’s directive, protect the children, shoot a judge, and a lawyer, and a GAL, and a therapist … a few clerks, and the big ‘n*****’ in the black robe who jacks off to the sound of children’s screams.”

When this editorial was brought up in a recent hearing, Judge Peter Brown, who is presiding over Paul’s case, laughably claimed that he didn’t think she was referring to Paul, though she quoted from his blog.

Paul already found out through discovery that Samantha McCord, the Connecticut State Police investigator who headed his investigation, wrote notes on emails stating, “speak to Katz only.”

Katz’s extraordinary and unofficial involvement is one many problems with this prosecution.