Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra
| Decision Date | 01 March 1995 |
| Docket Number | TRAFFORD-SEABRA |
| Citation | 655 A.2d 250 |
| Parties | James SEABRA v. Patricia 93-626-A. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
This case is on appeal from a decree of the Family Court granting joint custody of the minor child of the parties to the plaintiff, James Seabra and the defendant, Patricia Trafford-Seabra. The defendant appeals on the grounds that joint custody of the minor child is not in the best interests of the child. For the following reasons, we affirm the award of joint custody.
The facts pertinent to this appeal are as follows. On May 25, 1986, James Seabra (James) and Patricia Trafford-Seabra (Patricia) were married. On March 12, 1987, their only child, a son named Victor was born. 1 In December of 1989, after many years of an unsettled relationship and periods of living apart, James filed a complaint for divorce, seeking custody and visitation of Victor. Patricia subsequently filed a counterclaim for divorce also seeking custody of Victor.
On April 13, 1990, the trial justice issued a temporary order awarding Patricia sole custody of Victor. James was originally granted visitation rights of three times a week. On July 2, 1990, that visitation schedule was modified to include overnight visitation every Saturday morning through Sunday morning.
In September of 1990, during a period in which James was allowed unsupervised overnight visits with Victor, Patricia noticed small bruises on Victor's penis. On September 17, 1990, Patricia brought Victor to his pediatrician, Domenic Indindoli, M.D. Doctor Indindoli examined Victor and found evidence of a rash in the genital area that he diagnosed as petechia, minor hemorrhages in the capillaries in the surface of the skin. Doctor Indindoli concluded that petechia could be and is possibly consistent with sexual abuse. Patricia brought Victor to see her sister, Jean Trafford, a Providence police officer. Based on Victor's statement that he received the "boo-boo" on his penis from his paternal grandmother (Dolores Case), and the presence of petechia on Victor's penis, Patricia and Jean Trafford brought Victor to the North Providence Police Station where he repeated his allegations against his grandmother. When Patricia contacted Dr. Indindoli about the abuse allegations, he filed a physician's report with the Department for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF), which is a standard practice if a mother alleges sexual abuse.
The allegations were investigated on two separate occasions by DCYF, and both investigations indicated findings of abuse by Victor's grandmother and neglect on the part of James for failing to supervise Victor during the visitations in which the alleged abuse occurred. Also, Victor indicated to Patricia that James had "hit his penis." At the urging of DCYF investigator, Michael Bousquet, Patricia brought Victor for an evaluation by a psychotherapist who is a certified independent social worker with specialization in the area of sexual trauma, sexual victimization and sexual abuse treatment and assessment. On the basis of eight sessions, the psychotherapist recommended that James's visitation rights be suspended due to his finding that Victor's reports of sexual abuse were true.
At the same time, the trial justice ordered Victor to undergo evaluation by a clinical psychologist, Brian Hayden, Ph.D. Doctor Hayden met with Victor, James, and Patricia and found that Patricia's anxiety level and emotional problems deserved further evaluation. He suggested that at no time should Victor's grandmother be the sole custodial adult for Victor due to her history of emotional instability and alcohol abuse. He also concluded that overnight visitation with James would be suitable for Victor because there was no actual evidence of sexual abuse.
In the following months the relationship between the parties became increasingly strained. James filed a motion for change of custody and/or to modify visitation in order to either obtain custody of Victor or be awarded unsupervised visitation. Patricia sought to suspend James's visitation based on the allegations that he and his family had sexually assaulted Victor.
From July of 1991 through October of 1991, the trial justice heard testimony regarding these motions and the allegations of abuse and molestation. The court made a finding that there was no sexual abuse by James or Victor's paternal grandmother. On October 28, 1991, a temporary order was issued granting visitation to James. In addition, the order provided that Victor undergo psychological evaluation with Dr. Richard Solomon. Doctor Solomon found that it was impossible to determine the validity of the sexual maltreatment accusations. On the basis of his observations, Dr. Solomon indicated that Victor's visits with his father should be supervised and that clinical supervision of their relationship was advisable.
In July of 1992, Victor made a disclosure to the psychotherapist recounting an incident of sexual abuse by James and his uncle Peter Seabra (Peter), a man of diminished mental capacity....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Lynch
...the witness must be able to "observe, recollect, communicate, and appreciate the necessity of telling the truth." Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250, 252 (R.I.1995) (citing State v. Cabral, 122 R.I. 623, 629, 410 A.2d 438, 442 (1980)). This Court will overturn a competency decision onl......
-
State v. Lynch, No. 1999-327-C.A. (K1/96-591A) (RI 8/11/2004)
...the witness must be able to "observe, recollect, communicate, and appreciate the necessity of telling the truth." Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250, 252 (R.I. 1995) (citing State v. Cabral, 122 R.I. 623, 629, 410 A.2d 438, 442 (1980)). This Court will overturn a competency decision on......
-
State v. Rivera
...the obligation of this oath, and to give a correct account of what he may have seen or heard." Id. (quoting Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250, 252 (R.I. 1995)). When there is any doubt concerning a witness's minimum credibility, it "should be resolved in favor of allowing the jury to ......
-
Craveiro v. Craveiro
...overlooked or misconceived material evidence." DiMattia v. DiMattia, 747 A.2d 1008, 1008 (R.I.2000) (mem.) (citing Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250, 252 (R.I.1995)). The Duartes contend that the trial justice should have ordered plaintiff to pay them $24,000 after the sale of the ren......
-
Witnesses
...Trial court’s finding in this regard will be reversed on appeal only for a clear abuse of discretion. Compare: Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250 (R.I. 1995). Trial court did not abuse discretion in determining that mildly retarded individual , who became frightened by proceedings, who......
-
Witnesses
...Trial court’s inding in this regard will be reversed on appeal only for a clear abuse of discretion. Compare: Seabra v. Traৼord-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250 (R.I. 1995). Trial court did not abuse discretion in determining that mildly retarded individual , who became frightened by proceedings, who w......
-
Witnesses
...Trial court’s finding in this regard will be reversed on appeal only for a clear abuse of discretion. Compare: Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250 (R.I. 1995). Trial court did not abuse discretion in determining that mildly retarded individual , who became frightened by proceedings, who......
-
Witnesses
...Trial court’s finding in this regard will be reversed on appeal only for a clear abuse of discretion. Compare: Seabra v. Trafford-Seabra, 655 A.2d 250 (R.I. 1995). Trial court did not abuse discretion in determining that mildly retarded individual , who became frightened by proceedings, who......